You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Persuasion’ category.
Last week on the anniversary of Jane Austen’s Birthday we toured the ground floor of her Chawton home, now the Jane Austen House Museum. Shall we now mount these small stairs to visit the upstairs rooms? It’s allowed…Yes, let’s…
On the way up we pass this window looking out onto the Bakehouse and the garden to the rear of the house.
The central corridor leads you towards three rooms on the left and two rooms on the right. Let’s go first left…..
and into a room full (full!) of Austen family relics.
This fine portrait of John Austen hangs in pride of place over the fireplace. He was Jane Austen’s great- great- grandfather,and was remembered in the family for his miserly treatment of his windowed daughter…shades of Sense and Sensibility.
There are so many treasures in this room, I’ve decided to show you only a few…….this post will be long enough as it is and you are all busy people….
One of the most touching treasures is a small lock of the Reverend George Austen’s hair, taken after his death in Bath in 1805, and kept in a small parcel of paper labelled by Jane Austen as “My father’s hair”…
A book of Jane’s eldest brother, James’ poetry, in his own hand
Jane’s ivory cup and ball, at which she was very skilled, and some ivory spillikins,again a dexterous game at which she excelled….
Some baby’s caps……familiar items to the lady below…..
Susannah Sackree, “Caky”, the nursemaid to Edward Austen Knight’s children at Godmersham…..
…and a copy of her prayerbook….bound in red leather…
Silhouettes of General and Lady Jane Matthews, the parents of Anne Matthews who was James Austen’s first wife and mother to Anna Austen.
The wonderful receipt book of Martha Lloyd, completed in many different hands…..
Jane Austen’s copy of Mentoria,which she remembered when writing Mansfield Park.
Into the room opposite, facing the garden and not the road…..
With a short exhibit explaining all the different houses where Jane Austen lived in Hampshire and Bath
And glass cases holding more treasure….The needlecase which Jane Austen made for her niece, Louisa
Eliza de Feuillide’s rouge pot, a deliciously tiny porcelain pot decorated in gilt on a dark blue ground
A soft cream silk shawl,an expensive gift to Jane from Mrs Catherine Knight, Edward Austen’s adoptive mother ….
Then to another room across the corridor, overlooking the road, dedicated to the naval brothers….
With Frank Austen’s collapsible cabin bed…..
All neat , ship-shape and Bristol Fashion…..
As he was thought to be the insportaion for Captain Harville in Persuasion, some of his handiwork is on show…..
including a carved writing case thought to have been made by him…
All overlooked by his Admiral, Horatio Nelson, shown here in a commemorative plate dating from 1805.
Then into a tiny adjoining room that is kept in darkness for its contents are very precious. As you walk in a light is automatically switched on and you see the quilt Jane Austen made with her mother and Cassandra
Have you remembered to collect pieces for the patchwork? We are now at a stand-still.
The window at the end of the corridor looks out onto the garden….
and to the road leading to Edward’s home,Chawton House…..
and the Winchester road…….the finger post marking the way….
But if we retrace our steps back along the corridor, we reach a special bedroom….
Jane’s Room, the room she shared with Cassandra from 1809 till she moved to Winchester in July 1817.
Here is a replica of one of the two beds that Mr Austen ordered for Cassandra and Jane in 1794 while they were still living at Steventon, and which has recently been installed at the museum.
The room faces the garden and looks down onto the bakehouse….which you can see with its open door below.
The closet contains a wash bowl and ewer
And the small fireplace has been decked out for the Christmas season….
A whited spotted muslin dress is on show here
Simple but beautiful…..
A woman can never be too fine while she is in all white
Here is a short video of the room, which give you some idea of its dimensions, I think.
I do hope you enjoyed this second part of the tour. Next, the Gardens and Outbuildings.
I discovered this advertisement for Gowland’s Lotion in a copy of La Belle Assemblee dating from June 1st 1816 that I have in my possession yesterday, and I thought you might enjoy reading it:
(Do note you can enlarge it by clicking on it, in order to make it easier to read)
Gowland’s Lotion was of course mentioned by Jane Austen in Persuasion,when the idiotic Sir Walter, a man whose advice was always going to be questionable, advises Anne to use it for, having advised Mrs Clay ( foolish woman)to use it, her complexion had ”improved” tremendously:
In the course of the same morning, Anne and her father chancing to be alone together, he began to compliment her on her improved looks: he thought her “less thin in her person, in her cheeks; her skin, her complexion, greatly improved: clearer, fresher. Had she been using any thing in particular?” — “No, nothing.” “Merely Gowland,” he supposed. — “No, nothing at all.” “Ha! he was surprised at that”; and added, “Certainly you cannot do better than continue as you are; you cannot be better than well; or I should recommend Gowland, the constant use of Gowland, during the spring months. Mrs. Clay has been using it at my recommendation, and you see what it has done for her. You see how it has carried away her freckles.”
Chapter 16
Why foolish? Well, Gowland’s Lotion was known to have a damaging effect on complexions,certainly by the time Jane Austen was writing Persuasion.
The reason this original lotion was so caustic was of course its ingredients. It contained bitter almonds sugar,water and mercuric chloride.This last ingredient was a derivative of sulphuric acid. It was powerful enough to remove the top layer of skin of anyone who applied it: it was in effect an early form of chemical peel treatment. And of course if repeatedly applied to the skin one can only imagine the dreadful damage that would result. However by the time Jane Austen was writing about it, to add insult to injury,the ingredients of the original lotion had been adulterated, and its damaging effects were widely known.
If we review the history of Gowland’s Lotion all becomes very clear. John Gowland was an apothecary and the inventor of the lotion. John Gowland’s family were northern lawyers,but he did not follow in the family footsteps but became an apothecary. Through his extensive social contacts he rose to become the apothecary to the Frederick, Prince of Wales, heir to George II.
His claim to fame and fortune, Gowland’s Lotion, first attained great fame in 1743. Elizabeth Chudleigh, the famous bigamist, was appointed maid of honour to Frederick’s wife, Augusta, the Princess of Wales and became part of their court circle. Miss Chudleigh’s skin became blotchy and opaque,and aware that her face( and her body) was her fortune she sought the advice of the royal doctors fora cure. They subjected her to a regime of purging, sea-bathing, and other treatments which all proved to be ineffectual. Poor Miss Chudleigh resorted to using patches and paints to disguise her blemished complexion. This would never do for such an attractive and ambitious woman,who knew her face(and her body) was going to be her path to fortune and titles.(and in this she was right…her ambition was also her down fall and she was eventually tried and found guilty of bigamy in 1776)
In desperation, she eventually sought the advice of the court apothecary, Mr Gowland, and he diagnosed her problem as blocked pores. He therefore devised his lotion,which could be used to bathe the face and indeed any other affected area of the body, Gowlands Lotion as delineated above. The purging action of the lotion produced a form of scurf , the top layer of the epidermis in fact, that could be then rubbed away, taking all the blemishes with it. As a result the skin’s “bloom” would be recovered, and even unsightly blemishes like freckles were taken clean away.
As a result of the spectacular effect on Miss Chudleigh’s skin, the lotion was much in demand in society. Mr Gowland lived in Bond Street in London where he also dispensed his lotion to the fashionable hoards at a cost of 10 shillings and 6 pence per quart bottle.. Eventually Gowland was appointed to be George III’s apothecary in 1760 a post he held until his death in 1776..
He died a wealthy man,and having no children left the receipt for his famed lotion to his long standing friend ,Thomas Vincent, the principal oboist in the Kings Band,and clerk to the Royal Musick Closet. Mr Vincent began manufacturing the lotion, but sadly he soon had troubles of his own,which are hinted at in the advertisement above. You will not fail to note that throughout the advert refers to Mrs Vincent’s Gowland’s Lotion. Mrs Vincent was Mr Vincent’s second wife, Maria Elizabeth.
A very ambitious woman, during her husband’s absence abroad, she began making and marketing her own version of the lucrative lotion,despite not having the full details of the ingredients, which were kept secret from her. Mr Vincent began to counter her production by going into partnership with his son-in-law Robert Dickinson, and a trade war began between husband and wife, as to whose lotion was the “original and the best”. You can see in the advert above that Mrs Vincent has managed to make Lord Sherbourne refer slightingly to Mr Dickinson’s inferior product. Mrs Vincent unbelievably had the upper hand when it came to commerce and it was her version that captured most of the trade. Mr Vincent died in 1800,and Mr Dickinson eventually disappeared from view. Mrs Vincent continued to profit from selling her version of the lotion.
Mrs Vincent’s Gowlands lotion,with its unknown but clearly demertitious ingredients,had a dreadful effect on women’s complexions. As no doubt did repeated use of the original version. John Corry in his book Quack Doctors Dissected (1810) delineated very clearly the effects of applying the then available Gowland’s to one’s face:
There the lotion of Gowland that flays Ladies faces
Distorting the features of our Modern Graces.
Jane Austen appears to have understood this, and so it is no surprise therefore that she makes Sir Walter the mouthpiece for such bad advice,and Mrs Clay ( foolish woman)his dupe.
…but with a catch. The exhibition at the Bodleian Library is open for one day only.
If you can make it to Oxford on Monday 25th October, you will be able to see a selection of Jane Austen’s manuscripts to include Volume the First (shown below),
which includes most of her very early writings and the manuscript of Sanditon. Also on display will be Edward Knight’s set of his sister, Jane s novels.
The display is to coincide with the official launch of the Jane Austen Ficiton Manuscripts website which we have discussed before. This site will be fully operational and open to all from Monday, so even if you can’t travel to Oxford to see the manuscripts, etc, you can luxuriate in studying them from the comfort of your own computer, wherever you are in the world. I must confess I am already fining this site terribly useful for my own research, and am so pleased it has been brought not existence before the advent of the culture of vicious budgets cuts in which we now seem to live .
Professor Kathryn Sutherland of Oxford University is the curator of the exhibit. She writes:
Being able to view Austen’s original manuscripts reveals fascinating details about the mechanics and quirks of her handwriting. Her famous description of her way of working – “the little bit (two Inches wide) of Ivory on which I work with so fine a brush, as produces little effect after much labour” is borne out by the tiny homemade booklets into which she wrote – her style is obsessively economical, in her formation of carets from recycled elements of other letters, and her layered punctuation (the merging of a caret with the down stroke of a ‘p’ and a semi-colon with an exclamation mark), and her near compulsive use of the dash to maintain a material connection between her thoughts and the paper.
She has given some interesting interviews recently to coincide with the launch of the website. The article in the Telegraph, though ever-so-slightly incorrect and with its misleading and slightly sensational headline is of interest for it demonstrates that a close reading Jane Austen’s surviving manuscripts reveals her to be a very different person than usually portrayed, and certainly completely different from the carefully crafted image presented to the world by Jane Austen’s Victorian descendants, a process of “beatification” begun by Henry Austen in his Biographical Notice of his sister, published posthumously in December 1817 in the first edition of Persuasion.
It might at first appear strange that I am reviewing a book that was first published in 1948, but it has recently been re-printed in facsimile foom by Spire Books Ltd in association with the Bath Preservation Trust (whose property, Number 1 The Royal Crescent, is used to illustrate the cover of this book)
Walter Ison’s book is in fact an established classic and a deserves to be read and enjoyed by anyone who has visited Bath and has fallen under the spell of its Georgian Buildings; or, indeed, by anyone who has never been lucky enough to visit but has likewise fallen under its spell after reading about the city in such books as Northanger Abbey and Persuasion, where the buildings and city of Bath are essential elements of the book, the city being a character in its own right.
The first copy of this book that I owned was the edition that was revised and published in 1980 (see below) where the photographs were embedded in the text. The new edition is much more clearly set out, as was the original 1948 edition, with two distinct sections -text and line drawings in part one, then photographs and reproductions of contemporary engravings in part two: I much prefer it.
The new edition has an informative foreword by Michael Forsyth who is the Director of Studies in theConservation of Historic Buildings at the University of Bath and is also the author of another book on the architecture of Bath, the Yale Pevsner Guide to Baht, an excellent work, which was first published in 2003.
Walter Ison was born in another spa town, Leamington Spa in Warwickshire in 1908.He became a draftsman in an architectural practice in London where he first read Mowbray Green’s study of Georgian Bath, “Eighteenth Century Architecture of Bath“,which fired his imagination. It is no lie to say that he became obsessed with the city and the history of its development and its buildings. Bath degenerated as a spa town from the mid to late 19th century. It was not until the 1930s that it was realised that something had to be done to stop the city decaying completely and such treasures as the Assembly Rooms were at last recognised as being buildings of merit and, as such, were deserving of restoration and protection. In 1934 the Bath Preservation Trust was established and in 1936-8 the Assembly Rooms were restored. The Second World War then intervened and Bath was badly damaged by the so-called Baedeker offensive of 1942: 400 lives were lost and 329 buildings were destroyed in those air-raids, including the newly restored Assembly Rooms. A further 732 buildings were demolished as a result of damage in later air raids,and another 20,000 buildings were recorded by the City Engineer as having been damaged in some way as a result of the attacks.
Ison moved to Bath after his war time service with the air force ended, on the encouragement of his wife, Leonora. She also donated an important personal legacy to him, so that he had the funds with which to be able to research,write and finish his proposed book. Taking his inspiration from earlier histories of the buildings of Bath, including John Wood the Elder’s own version(see above) his resulting book is a comprehensive history of the building of the city and all its major buildings, and the architects responsible. The book was rather touchingly and appropriately dedicated to his wife.
The book is divided into chapters which deal with the development of the city, the pubic buildings,domestic buildings and representative buildings of the period 1700-1725, 1726-1750, 1750-1775, 1775-1800 and finally 1800-1830. The text of the book is also studded with magnificent plans and line drawings of the important buildings. Above is his ground plan, section and elevation of the Hot Bath where Mrs Smith in Persuasion went to receive her treatment, living close by in the lowly Westgate Buildings.
The second part of the book is filled with contemporary engravings -such as this, above of the Pump Room and the new private baths from Stall Street and photographs( all in black and white) taken mostly in the late 1940s
Now, it has to be remembered that when Jane Austen knew Bath the buildings were not yet blackened with industrial grime. This photograph of Great Pultney Street from Ison’s book shows the buildings as I first remember them from my first visit to the city aged 5 in the early 1960s. The soot and grime of the Victorian era -coal fires and grime from the nearby industrial town of Bristol- had turned most of the buildings black, and it was only from the mid 195os that a programme of cleaning and the effects of the Clean Air Acts enabled them to be returned almost to the white glare of the newly recreated limestone buildings that so distressed Anne Elliot in Persuasion. But the photographs now have a period charm of their own-the cars and sometimes the 1940s fashions of the people shown in them are now as fascinating to me as the sedan chair and muslins of the inhabitants of the 18th century prints and engravings
(My photograph of Pulteney Street taken this summer)
Interior views are also inlcuded: not only of the great public buildings like the Guildhall, but of more domestic settings as such as this first floor drawing room of number 41 Gay Street: Jane Austen, remember, lived briefly at number 25 Gay Street after the death of her father, and in Persuasion it was the home of The Crofts.
The book is easy to read and comprehensively covers every aspect of the creation of the famed Georgian buildings in the city. Walter Ison died in 1997, and this new edition ensures that his book will live on as a classic, in his memory. I can highly recommend this magnificent book, and do hope that some of you are tempted by this review to rush out and buy it.
Sophie Croft in Persuasion is one of my favourite of all Jane Austen’s characters. Intelligent, kind, humorous, a woman of sense, in love with her husband the Admiral, she is widely travelled and has an admirably positive attitude to life:
“And I do assure you, ma’am,” pursued Mrs. Croft, “that nothing can exceed the accommodations of a man-of-war; I speak, you know, of the higher rates. When you come to a frigate, of course, you are more confined; though any reasonable woman may be perfectly happy in one of them; and I can safely say, that the happiest part of my life has been spent on board a ship. While we were together, you know, there was nothing to be feared. Thank God! I have always been blessed with excellent health, and no climate disagrees with me. A little disordered always the first twenty-four hours of going to sea, but never knew what sickness was afterwards. The only time that I ever really suffered in body or mind, the only time that I ever fancied myself unwell, or had any ideas of danger, was the winter that I passed by myself at Deal, when the Admiral (Captain Croft then) was in the North Seas. I lived in perpetual fright at that time, and had all manner of imaginary complaints from not knowing what to do with myself, or when I should hear from him next; but as long as we could be together, nothing ever ailed me, and I never met with the smallest inconvenience.”
Did women like Sophie Croft really exist? Well, yes, they did….
(©Bath Spa University)
Elizabeth “Besty“ Fremantle nee Wynne (pictured above) was a real life Mrs Croft. For some years now, I have been advocating that people read her diaries to understand what life was like for an elite woman, married to an officer, on board a ship of Nelson’s navy while on active service.
Though now out of print, above is the frontispiece of the 1935 edition of Betsey’s diaries- which combined extracts from Betsey’s diaries with those written by Betsey’s sister Eugenia, shown below- edited by Anne Fremantle, are a fascinating read and you can still find secondhand copies easily enough.
( Source: Andy Boddington at dukesofbuckingham.org.uk on 17.9.10)
The daughter of a Lincolnshire squire, Richard Wynne of Folkingham,( see below for a picture of the parish church)
Betsey began her diary writing habit at the age of 11 ,and continued until her death in 1857. A Catholic family, the Wynnes lived mostly in Europe, visiting England only briefly partially due to pressing money troubles- Betsey’s father sold his Lincolnshire estate in 1786. Betsey was born in Venice, brought up mainly on the continent, and her family moved in courtly circles. She vividly describes her life amongst the glitterati of the Naples court and her diaries are full if very detailed information. Which makes them a delight to read.
(Source: Andy Boddington at dukesofbuckingham.org.uk on 17.9.10)
She met her husband, Captain Thomas Fremantle, shown above, when she was evacuated from Naples in 1796. Her marriage ceremony was arranged with the help of Emma Hamilton and she began life as an officer’s wife on board HMS Inconstant in 1797. Here are some extracts from her diaries (complete with her idiosyncratic spelling) to give you an idea of what she experienced:
Monday January 15th 1797 ( the day after her marriage to Captain Fremantle-jfw):
We sailed last night , had fair weather and pretty good wind all day. I find it quite odd to be alone here. I dare not think on those I left at Naples for it makes my heart swell with anguish , however I can make no complaints for I am as happy in my situation as it is possible to be. Freemantle is all attention and kindness.I have got a comfortable little cabin where I can do what I like.The Vice Roy and Colonel drinkwater are pleasant society for us.
Sunday 22nd January 1797:
We had a long and tedious passage. Very blowing weather …it did not affect me, it increased my appetite and I laughed at everybody else. We only came to anchor this morning at three o’ clock. I begin to get accustomed to the life I lead and find myself comfortable and happy….I spent the evening alone and amused myself very well with my Harpsichord and books.
Friday 27th January 1797:
I was quite miserable all the morning as the three Mariners were punished and flogged along side of every ship, some men flogged likewise on board.
Tuesday March 21st 1797:
We took a prize in the night a small Spanish ship with 9000 dollars who was going to Cicely (Sicily-jfw) for corn.
Eventually, Betsey’s life on board became rather more serious: she had to nurse both her husband and Nelson who had both been wounded in the disastrous Battle of Santa Cruz de Tenerife. Nelson had his arm partially amputated, and caring for him and her husband while returning to England on HMS Seahorse- Captain Fremantle appears from her entries in the diary , in my opinion, to have been suffering from what we would now term shell shock- could not have been an easy task for the newly pregnant Betsey. Her characteristically frank entry in her diary for 24th August 1797 indicates her feelings:
A foul wind which make the Admiral fret. He is a very bad patient
They returned to England where eventually Fremantle recovered. Betsey ran their estate while he was at sea-he served at Trafalgar and produced a family of children. Keeping her diary all the time.
And now to some very interesting news. Dr Elaine Chalus of Bath Spa University has recently been awarded a grant of £100,000 to write Betsey’s biography. She has,as I understand it, been granted access to Betsey’s papers by her descendants. I simply can’t wait . The original diary is wonderful to have and to hold but was crying out for more detailed annotation and furthermore, rather frustratingly ends in 1820. Betsey’s life as wife, on board ship and on land, as a mother, capably managing the family estate, and then after the wars as a well-connected elite woman of the early 19th century is fascinating and deserves to be explained and brought to a wider audience. I’m so pleased that Dr Chalus-whose interest in Betsey was sparked when she found a second-hand paperback copy of her diaries at a village fair- has the funding needed to provide us with a full and detailed biography of one of my favourite diarists of this era.
I shall keep an eye on publication dates etc and will of course review the book here when it is available. But in the meantime, do try and get hold of a copy of the out of print diaries: fans of Persuasion and Mrs Croft will not regret it.
The Georgian Garden in Bath is a marvellous and very rare example of the type of garden that many of Jane Austen’s characters and, indeed, Jane Austen herself may have experienced while living in a Georgian town house, not necessarily only in Bath but in London too. This town house garden is now to be found situated to the rear of Number 4,The Circus ( the house is not open to the public, note).
Let’s see where in Bath this garden is to be found. Here is part of my 1802 map of Bath taken from John Feltham’s book, A Guide to all the Watering and Sea Bathing Places ,
showing the area of the Circus and the Gravel Walk, and here is it annotated with the approximate position of the Garden (1) and the House (2).
To gain access to the garden you have to walk along the Gravel Walk, which connects the Royal Crescent with Queen’s Square, and which was, of course, the secluded, gently rising walk that Captain Wentworth and Anne Elliot of Persuasion took when they were finally reconciled, engrossed in each others revelations but not so blind as to realise that the path they were taking was the long way round to Sir Walter’s home in Camden Crescent 
These insignificant doors set into the wall surrounding the gardens (seen to the left of the photograph)are the rear entrances to the gardens to the houses.
They hide many treasures and due to the benevolence of the Bath and North East Somerset Council , anyone visiting Bath can now experience what the gardens of these townhouses were like. Access to the garden is totally free of charge and the garden is open all year round. How truly admirable.
Number 4 the Circus was completed in 1761, part of John Wood the Elders scheme for the new Upper Town. In February 1754, Wood laid the foundation stone of the very first house, but, sadly, just three months later, he died. It was left to his son, John Wood the Younger, to complete and oversee the construction of the King’s Circus, as it was originally called. The frontages of the 33 houses are uniform ( though as you can see from the photograph below, the rear of the houses are an entirely different story).
Each house is decorated with elements of the three great Classical orders of architecture: the ground floor decorated in the style of the Doric order , the second in the Ionic order , and the third floor, the Corinthian.
The Circus was, as you can see from the section of the map, above, built in three segments of 11 houses.The circular area that the houses encircle was originally cobbled and had a covered reservoir which supplied water to the houses. This central island is now covered with grass and five great plane trees, which were planted in the early nineteenth century provide shade, but do block the views. Above is the view of the Circus looking towards Gay Street. Sadly no plans exist to show us how the gardens to the rear of these houses appeared in the Georgian era. As you can see from the map of the Circus above, only approximations of the gardens behind these houses were made by the then mapmaker.
However as a result of recent extensive excavations it has been possible to reconstruct how the garden would have appeared in the late 18th century. Walled on four sides, it provided a private, decorative space for the occupier of the house.
Here is a plan of the garden as it appeared when it was first built. Do note that all the photographs and plans in this post can be enlarged by clicking on them, so that you may enjoy the detail.
And here is a key of the plan showing the different elements of the garden:
And a photograph with which to compare the plans:
The Bath Archeological Trust undertook excavations of the garden in 1985 for by then the original Georgian structure of the garden had been lost under later improvements. The walled garden that was then to the rear of Number 4 the Circus was Victorian in the main, and boasted a lawn, a rockery, a classical pavilion and a fish pond which both dated from the 1920s. This is a plan of the garden as it was before the excavation began (again, please use the same key above to discern the different elements of the garden).
The Georgian garden as revealed by the excavations had no grass or lawn at all. It was a very formal design and most of the garden was covered with a surface of gravel mixed with clay. This would have needed to have been rolled regularly to keep it in order,and was much kinder to walk on than wet grass to the fashionable fabric shoes of the 18th and early 19th centuries.
Here is a period roller, placed in the garden to remind you that while it is practical, this surface is not maintenance fee.
Here is a view of the garden of 10 Downing Street by George Lambert , circa 1736-1740,
and this close up of part of the painting showing the roller in use at that time:
As you can see from the plan and the photographs, the walled garden to Number 4, the Circus also has small flower beds around the walls, and three flower beds along the central axis of the garden. All are now edged in box. Its design was very similar to this one by J. A. Smith dating from 1807.
The geometric design of the garden was quite deliberate: it was to be seen to its best advantage when viewed from the upper windows of the house that over looked it. Around 1770 a flight of steps was added to the rear of the garden to give access to the newly created Gravel Walk.
It has now been completely renovated and planted with only shrubs and flowers that would have been available in the 18th century.Which means that at this time of the year, early August, there are few flowers available -no repeat flowering roses for example.Luckily, the structure is interesting in itself and of course the fashionable would not be in town or Bath at this time but away on their country estates An appropriate garden seat has also been added which faces the house:
We ought to perhaps recall that the small domestic private gardens of the 18th century town house were innovations. At the beginning of the 18th century, town houses often had nothing by way of a garden but a simple paved yard, but by the advent of the early 19th century a walled garden, home to flowers and shrubs was to be found at the rear of the terraced house homes of the middling and upper classes who lived in English cities. The Georgian Garden in Bath is a remarkable survivor of this type of garden, and if you are visiting Bath do not miss it. It is not advertised much at all and is almost hidden in the corner of the Gravel Walk. But do seek it out: its secluded peace is great to explore and the atmosphere is very different to the walled gardens to be found in towns today.
Like this:
London Calling is a newish blog written by General Southerner, aka Tony and while his blog is not Jane Austen specific, he does mention her enough to warrant our attention.
He has a lovely interesting account of a trip to Chawton
(this is the view from the stairs taken from just outside Jane Austen’s bedroom at the rear of Jane Austen’s House Museum) and neighbouring Alton ,the small town where Frank Austen sometimes resided and where Jane would often walk to visit her friends.
A trip to Richmond in Surrey,where the rather demanding Mrs Churchill expired, and a trip to Lyme for a treacherous walk on the Cobb( re engineered in 1825, and overseen by one Captain Darcy ( no relation I’m sure),IIRC!) and much more.
I do recommend a visit over there to Tony’s blog:he is an occasional visitor here. I do hope you enjoy it. Frankly it’s refreshing to get a masculine take on things Jane, don’t you agree?.
She, poor soul, is tied by the leg. She has a blister on one of her heels, as large as a three shilling piece
Persuasion, Chapter 18
I confess that when I first read Persuasion as a callow youth of 13 (all those years ago), I thought this was a piece of humour on the Admiral’s part,comparing his wife’s blister to something like a non-existent piece of coinage, rather like the infamous 9 bob note (which referred to a disastrously fraudulent attempt to print a 10 shilling note, a piece of information which once again gives some indication of my great age)
But no. These coins actually existed. So it was no joke on the Admiral’s part.
This is a picture of the coinage in use during Jane Austen’s life time:
The three shilling piece is shown at the bottom right of the picture. And do remember you can enlarge this and all the other illustrations here simply by clicking on them.
But this is a clearer picture of a 1814 three shilling piece, that I was lucky enough to find on my travels over Easter
The story of the 3 shilling piece is very interesting. In the latter years of George III’s reign, as a result of the shortages caused by the continuing Napoleonic Wars, the price of silver was high . Therefore using silver for making coins became increasingly prohibitive in relation to the face value of the coins themselves, and as a result there was an acute shortage of silver coins available for circulation.
This as you can imagine caused problems for both tradesmen and ordinary people. The Bank of England took steps to remedy this situation by issuing two tokens, not made of silver, which had values of three shillings and eighteen pence, between the years 1811 and 1816.
In 1816 a Great Recoinage took place, and after 1820 the tokens were no longer considered to be legal tender.
So, just how large was the three shilling coin, and what sort of suffering was Mrs Croft undergoing?
On examining this picture you can see that the coin is in fact quite large: 1 and a 1/4 inches in diameter. And unless the Admiral was prone to exaggeration I therefore feel a great deal of sympathy for Sophie Croft, who would have been in a great deal of discomfort with a blister that size on her heel. Poor lady….no wonder she was tied by the leg in Gay Street
By all their calculations there was just time for this; but as they drew near the Cobb, there was such a general wish to walk along it once more, all were so inclined, and Louisa soon grew so determined, that the difference of a quarter of an hour, it was found, would be no difference at all; so with all the kind leave-taking, and all the kind interchange of invitations and promises which may be imagined, they parted from Captain and Mrs. Harville at their own door, and still accompanied by Captain Benwick, who seemed to cling to them to the last, proceeded to make the proper adieus to the Cobb.
Persuasion, Chapter 12
Unless we are lucky enough to live at Lyme Regis, then the answer is probably, no.
But if you go here, you will able to watch the view from the Cobb all day, every day via the good offices of the official Lyme Regis Web Cam Enjoy yourselves do, but watch your steps….Remember what happened to Louisa Musgrove;-)
Today’s post has nothing to do with Sandition, although Laurel’s really fascinating Group Read of Jane Austen’s fragment continues at Austenprose.
But it does concern a seaside resort of which Jane Austen was fond, Lyme Regis, and the Lyme Regis Philpot Musem’s attempt to publish a manuscript “epic” poem about the town written in 1819. Mary Godwin ,the museum’s curator, has very kindly supplied me with some images and quotes from the poem so that I can share news of their project with you here.
The Lyme Regis Philpot Museum has had in its collection since 1978, a manuscript which was given to the museum by the artist, Laurence Whistler.
Called The Lymiad, or Letters from Lyme to a friend in Bath by a Unknown Gentlewoman, the manuscript consists of a series of eight letters all written in verse, about the town of Lyme and it inhabitants as they were in 1819.
Each letter describes in turn, the streets and lodgings, the sea and beach, the civil war siege and Monmouth, the assembly room,; the mayor and worthies of the town, theatrically entitled, the dramatis personae
the surrounding scenery and bad weather; and, finally, departure from the resort. All of which would have been familiar to Jane Austen who visited the town in September 1804.
The writer John Fowles who in 1978 had just started his ten-year stewardship of the Museum as its Honorary Curator, was very intrigued by the new addition to the collection. After reading it he was so impressed with The Lymiad that he regarded it as among the Museum’s most precious possessions.
He liked it for its wit and satirical humour and its vivid evocation of the manners and pastimes of a small Regency seaside resort:
Say, is there not the mostly group among,
One generous bard, one gentle “child of song”
To celebrate thy wonders, matchless Lyme!,
In all the wild luxuriance of rhyme? …
Each letter in turn looks at at the streets and lodgings; the sea and beach; the civil war siege and Monmouth; the assembly rooms; the mayor and worthies; scenery and bad weather; and finally departure from the resort by the narrator.
The Lymiad contains many vivid portraits of local residents: for example in this extract The Lymeiad’s author probably refers to the geologist, Henry de la Beche’s sailing boat:
That “Blood-red flag” which gaily floats
On the full-swelling breeze, denotes
The Conrad Sir Fopling Fossil’s pride;…
He is the most accomplished youth,
That is, if Madame Fame speaks truth;
And more than this I cannot tell,
But some who know Sir Fopling well,
Inform me he’s a F.G.S.
During the 1980s John Fowles made a transcript of the poem, prepared a general introduction and made some explanatory notes on local references within it.
In 1997 the manuscript, which was on display in the Museum, came to the attention of Dr. John Constable, then Professor of English Literature in Kyoto University. During consultations with John Fowles over the next few years, Professor Constable studied the transcript and wrote a substantial introduction to it. He considers that The Lymiad is
“a highly political and a thoroughly Whig poem, with some leanings towards the left of that party, though stopping short of Radicalism itself.”
In this extract the author is poking fun at the fact that Lyme was a “rotten borough” in the control of the Fane family, the most senior member of that family being the Earl of Westmoreland:
Know then my friend, since last I wrote,
Here hath been pass’d a day of note,
When ‘tis the fashion to declare,
Who next shall be our worthy Mayor.
This day is honoured every year
By presence of a noble peer,…
The town of voters hath but few;
So few, that at th’Election last…
Th’Electors, and elected too,
In one horse chaise appear’d to view:
Sadly, John Fowles died in 2005 before any publication of the poem could be undertaken. But now the Lyme Museum has decided to ask for subscribers so that a first and fully annotated edition can be published.
The Museum has already secured some grants towards the cost of producing the book from charitable foundations and other donors, but in order to complete the task of publishing this manuscript they now need to attract 100 subscribers, who will pledge £20 per volume, and whose names will be recorded in the publication itself.
Once sufficient numbers of subscribers have been received the publication project will be able to be got underway.
If you go here you will find a form that can be copied, filled in and sent to the present curator of the Lyme museum, Mary Godwin (and she will even accept subscriptions made by copying and pasting the form in an email: I know because that how I subscribed) .
If you would like any more details of the publication her email address is
curator-at-lymeregismuseum-dot-co-dot-uk
replacing “at” and “dot” with the necessary to fool spammers
The Lyme Regis Museum’s publication of The Lymiad will rather fittingly and touchingly be dedicated to John Fowles’s memory.
Do note that the new edition will not be a facsimile of the original manuscript. Instead, it is being cleverly designed to appear as it might have done in had it been published in 1819 .It will have stitched pages and marbled card covers .
I understand that the edition will contain an essay by John Fowles on Lyme in the early 1800s which he revised in 2003, a general introduction and textual notes by John Constable, a transcription of the text complete with editorial notes by John Fowles, John Constable and Jo Draper and that it will be illustrated with pictures from the Museum’s wonderful collection, which have also been selected by Jo Draper.
I have already subscribed because I am absolutely fascinated by the thought of reading an insider’s view of the place Jane Austen visited and liked so much that she ensured that pivotal scenes from Persuasion occurred there . And also because I adore this museum, and try visit it every time I visit Lyme.
I do hope that some of you may be sufficiently interested to subscribe to this fascinating pubication project too.
We do not know exactly when the Austen ladies quitted their rented accommodation in Gay Street but it must have been sometime at the end of 1805.
We do know that Mrs Austen, Cassandra, Jane and, by this time, their friend and sister of James’s wife, Martha Lloyd took a trip to Steventon Rectory in January 1806,and it is possible that they quitted number 25 at that time.
They visited their old home in order to visit James and Mary and their family in January 1806. Martha became part of their household on the death of her mother Mrs Lloyd in April 1805 They returned to Bath at the end of January.
When they arrived back in Bath from Steventon the Austen sisters did have some welcome news. An old friend of the Leigh Perrots , Mrs Lillingston, had left them a legacy of £50 each, which funded Jane Austen’s whole expenditure for a year. Mrs Lillington indeed, may have inspired part of the character of Lady Russell in Persuasion.
The Austen ladies then took what they hoped would be temporary lodgings right in the very heart and bustle of Bath in Trim Street.( Number 7 on the annotated map, above) A place Cassandra Austen had once hoped they might never inhabit….
In the meantime she assures you that she will do everything in her power to avoid Trim Street although you have not expressed the fearful presentiment of it which was rather expected.
(See Letter to Cassandra Austen dated 3rd January 1801)
This position was rather confined-right in the heart of the town- and had no prospects of views to the surrounding countryside. It was also old, noisy and as the street was narrow possibly dark and consequently, not a little smelly….
The street was named after George Trim, a wealthy clothier of Bath, whose mother is reputed to have been related to the architect Inigo Jones. Writing about the design of the original Guildhall in Bath (which was replaced by the present Guildhall designed by Thomas Badlwin in 1776), reputedly by Inigo Jones, John Wood in his book, A Description of Bath noted :
For if my information be true, Mr Jones not only thought it a Duty incumbent on him as Kings Architect to examine what had not many years before been repaired by the Board of Works, to see if anything remained to be done from that Office; but was led by a natural inclination to render the City all the service in his Power; he having been a near relation to Mrs Trim the Mother of Mr George Trim the founder of Trim Street…
Page 316
Mr Trim was a member of the Bath Corporation (the ruling council in Bath) and he was one of the first to support the plans for the city’s expansion against much opposition as detailed by John Wood, again in his book, A Description of Bath:
But notwithstanding this Mr. George Trim a worthy Member of the Corporation thought it expedient to augment the Building of the New City and in the year 1707 that Gentleman began a new street at the North West Corner of it; His Example stirred up another Citizen to purchase a Lease of some Land at the South East Corner of the Town and to promote building there; So that as the City now began to shew graceful suburbs the Inhabitants were desirous of Promoting a trade for the better support of it; and with this view, they not only proposed to make the River navigable to Bristol but the later end of the Year 1710, they applied to Parliament for a Power to carry their design into Execution and obtained an Act accordingly…
As above, page 226
It has often been remarked that this time spent in Bath was Jane Austen’s “barren” period- years in which she did not write or achieve much by way of composition. I’m not sure. I think she used her mind like some form of word processor and “worked” on her texts, revising and composing continually , not necessarily committing it to paper before she was on to almost the final draft.
But, to my mind Jane Austen needed peace and quiet and a settled routine to be truly effective in her composition and writing : I think her life in Bath, when she was at the beck and call of the Leigh Perrots, her mother , visiting cousins etc and making a delicate balance between those with whom they could afford to keep company and those who had a far wealthier lifestyle and accordingly the Austen ladies couldn’t afford to allow “in”, was a constant vexation and distraction. I also think she found the constantly changing population of Bath- many people only stayed a matter of weeks to take the waters-totally exhausting. Just look at this telling extract from her letter to Cassandra Austen of 8th April 1805:
They want us to drink tea with them tonight, but I do not know whether my Mother will have nerves for it. We are engaged tomorrow Evening. What request we are in! Mrs Chamberlayne expressed to her niece her wish of being intimate enough with us to ask us to drink tea with her in a quiet way. We have therefore offered ourselves & our quietness thro’ the same medium. Our Tea & sugar will last a great while. I think we are just the kind of people & party to be treated about among our relations; we cannot be supposed to be very rich.
Her walks were probably the only peace and quiet she could command, and I think they were consequently rather important to her. They are certainly mentioned a lot in her letters. If you look at this section from John Cary’s map of the Environs of Bath from Cary’s Traveller’s Companion or a Delineation of the Turnpike Roads of England and Wales etc. (1812)
you can see some of the places she waked to during her stay in Bath. Do click on the maps(as you can all the images here) in order to enlarge them:
….notably Lyncombe and Widcombe: mostly uphill out ward journeys as Bath is situated in a sort of pudding basin terrain
Some of the places she visited on foot are marked on the annotated map as follows:
1 Charlecombe
2 Lansdown
3 Twerton
4 Widcombe
To return to Trim Street. By April Mrs Austen if we can judge from the address written on her letter to her daughter in law Mary, wife of James, was feeling exasperated at still living there:
Trim Street Still.
I had a letter the other day from Edwd. Cooper, he wrote to congratulate us on Frank’s Victory and to invite us to Hamstall in the ensuing Summer., which invitation we seem disposed to accept…we are disappointed of the lodgings in St James’s Square, a person is in treaty for the whole House, so of course he will be prefer’d to us who want only a part- We have look’d at some others since but don’t quite like the situation-hope a few days hence we shall have more choice as it is supposed many will go from Bath when this gay week is over…
The St James Square house did not materialize:
which was a pity as it was a far more congenial area of Bath- on rising ground in the Upper town on the outskirts, overlooking open countryside. But obviously far more expensive accommodation than they could afford: the reality of their financial situation I think was now beginning to set in.
And though the Austen ladies did eventually make the trip to visit their cousins, the Coopers, at Hamstall Ridware in Stafffordshire , they decided it was time to leave Bath and give up the hunt for elusive good accommodation for ever…..because Jane‘s brother, Frank, fortuitously suggested they set up home with his new bride, Mary Gibson in Southampton.
And thus ended Jane Austen’s time in Bath: we shall never know if it was a wholly happy time. I tend to think it was not: a mixture of a busy period, a period of sorrow, frustration and perhaps, some pleasure for her…but Im sure she used her time there to her eventual advantage,watching and learning a lot about human behaviour in all its manifestations while she lived in that busy place.
She certainly used her knowledge of the topography of Bath to great effect in Persuasion, and also knew how to portray the lives of the seemingly rich (the Elliots in Camden Place )and those clinging onto gentility by a very slender thread (Mrs Smith in Westgate Buildings).
But I think, on the whole she was glad not to be there any more for, as she wrote to Cassandra Austen in 1808
It will be two years to-morrow since we left Bath for Clifton, with what happy feelings of escape!
(See Letter to Cassandra Austen dated 30th June 1808)
After Mr Austen’s death in Green Park Buildings in January 1805, Mrs Austen gave up the lease there sometime towards the end of March of that year, and moved with Cassandra And Jane to number 25 Gay Street, numbered 6 on the above plan which, along with all the other illustrations in this post can be enlarged by clicking on it
Gay Street was part of John Wood’s original plan for the development of a new upper town in Bath, which began with his construction of Queens Square, then led up the hill via Gay Street to the Circus, and along Brock Street to the Royal Crescent.
In his book, A Description of Bath,
John Wood the architect tell us of his plans to buy land in Bath from Mr Robert Gay, an eminent Surgeon of Bath and London in order to build this important connecting street:
After my return to London I imparted my first design to Mr Gay an eminent Surgeon in Hatton Gardens and Proprietor of the land; and our first Conference as upon the first day of December 1725….
Page 232)
Business calling me twice not the North of England in the summer of the Year 1726 my designs for Improving Bath lay under Consideration till the following Autumn; and Mr Gay’s Land appearing then the most eligible to begin buildings upon, I therefore on Wednesday the 18th of November 1726 fixed my Preliminary Articles with him; and the Saturday after he empowered me by his Letter of Attourney, to engage with anybody that I could bring into the scheme for Building a Street of one thousand and twenty five Feet in length from south to North by fifty Feet in Breadth from East to West for a way to the grand part of the design.
(pages 240-1)
Here is a print of The Cirucs, which is situated at the top of Gay Street, as it appeared in 1773:
You can see that Gay Street steeply descends the hill towards Queen’s Square in the break in the circle of houses in the middle of the picture. You can also see Beechen Cliff looming above it in the distance:
You can also see many chairs. They were the most practicable manner of getting around some of the areas of Bath as they are very steep and, something I can confirm from personal experience of toiling up the hill that is Gay Street, when pregnant and also later with a pushchair containing my deceptively heavy son, it is not easy terrain. The alternative route ,via the Gravel Walk as used by Anne Elliot and Captain Wentworth in Persuasion is much preferable, being of a gentler gradient.
The Austen ladies were of course at this time beginning to find that their financial position was not particularly secure. By his will Mr Austen left everything to Mrs Austen. But of course his main source of income was the money from his livings of Deane and Steventon and any entitlement to that money ceased at the moment of his death. Mrs Austen had a little independent income and Cassandra had the interest on the £1000 left to her by her late finance Tom Fowle, but Jane Austen had nothing whatsoever in the way of income.
The letters sent between the Austen brothers at this time indicate quite interesting attitudes to the economic and social fate of the Austen ladies. Frank -who is quite my favourite of the Austen brothers – had just been appointed to the 80-gun HMS Canopus. He generously offered £100 per annum towards the upkeep of Mrs Austen and his sisters, and did so in a letter to Henry Austen requesting that he keep this offer secret from the ladies.
Here is part of Henry’s illuminating reply to him:
It was so absolutely necessary that your noble offer towards my Mother should be made more public than you seem’d to desire, that I really cannot apologize for a partial breach of your request. With the proudest exultations of maternal tenderness the Excellent Parent has exclaimed that never were Children so good as hers. She feels the magnificence of your offer, and accepts of half. I shall therefore honor her demands for 50 pounds annually on your account. James had the day before yesterday communicated to me & Her his desire to be her Banker for the same annual assistance, & l as long as I am an Agent shall do as he does. – If Edward does the least he ought, he will certainly insist on her receiving a £100 from him. So you see My Dear E, that with her own assured property, & Cassandra’s, both producing about £250 per ann., She will be in the receipt of a clear £450 pounds per Ann. – She will be very comfortable, & as a smaller establishment will be as agreeable to them, as it cannot but be feasible, I really think that My Mother & Sisters will be to the full as rich as ever. They will not only suffer no personal deprivation, but will be able to pay occasional visits of health and pleasure to their friends..‘
I cant help but hear some resonances of John and Fanny Dashwood of Sense and sensibility in that extract.
James Austen also wrote to Frank about the financial situation:
Her (Mrs Austen-jfw) future plans are not quite settled, but I believe her summers will be spent in the country amongst her Relations & chiefly I trust among her children – the winters she will pass in comfortable lodgings in Bath. It is a just satisfaction to know that her Circumstances will be easy, & that she will enjoy all those comforts which declining years & precarious health call for. You will I am sure forgive Henry for not having entirely complied with your request for secrecy upon one very important subject in your letter … You would indeed have had a high gratification could you have witnessed the pleasure which our Dear Mother experienced when your intention was communicated to her.
So poor old Jane Austen was also now an object of charity .I’m sure this did not sit well with her. it’s one thing to be kept by ones parents, but ones married brothers?
There are some hints in the two letters written at this time by Jane Austen that still exist, that life in Gay Street without the kindly and benign influence of Mr Austen might have been rather trying: Mrs Austen was most definitely in charge:
The Mr Duncans called yesterday with their Sisters, but were not admitted, which rather hurt me.
(See Letter to Cassandra Austen dated 8th April 1805)
Jane Austen found few congenial souls to bond with in the transient society of Bath: to have some friends turned away by your mother when you were actually “at home” and ready to engage must have been hurtful indeed.
We know very little about the house as it was at the time when Jane Austen lived in it. Gay Street was a very busy street, full of chairs carrying people from the Upper to the Lower town, and would have been noisy. It was firmly set into the centre of town with very little chance of good views of the surrounding countryside. But Jane Austen obviously absorbed all the details and was perhaps fond of it for Gay Street is the setting for a very important meeting between Captain Wentworth and Anne Elliot in the Cancelled Chapters of Persuasion, at the home of the Crofts in Bath..in Gay Street.
I’ve tried to decipher these cancelled chapters on many an occasion when I’ve seen them on show in the British Museum, the British Library and at Jane Austen’s House in Chawton but with not much success: I’ve scanned these in for you form a recent “translation” : here is part of the meeting between Anne and Frederick in Gay Street:
It was altogether a confusion of Images & Doubts–a perplexity, an agitation which she could not see the end of–and she was in Gay St & still so much engrossed, that she started on being addressed by AdmL Croft, as if he were a person unlikely to be met there. It was within a few steps of his own door.–”You are going to call upon my wife, said he, she will be very glad to see you.”–Anne denied it “No–she really had not time, she was in her way home”–but while she spoke, the AdmL had stepped back & knocked at the door, calling out, “Yes, yes do go in; she is all alone. go in & rest yourself.”–Anne felt so little disposed at this time to be in company of any sort, that it vexed her to be thus constrained–but she was obliged to stop. “Since you are so very kind, said she, I will just ask Mrs Croft how she does, but I really cannot stay 5 minutes.–You are sure she is quite alone.”–The possibility of Capt. W. had occurred–and most fearfully anxious was she to be assured–either that he was within or that he was not; which, might have been a question.–”Oh! yes, quite alone–Nobody but her Mantuamaker with her, & they have been shut up together this half hour, so it must be over soon.”–”Her Mantua maker!–then I am sure my calling now, wd be most inconvenient.–Indeed you must allow me to leave my Card & be so good as to explain it afterwards to Mrs C.” “No, no, not at all, not at all. She will be very happy to see you. Mind–I will not swear that she has not something particular to say to you–but that will all come out in the right place. I give no hints.–Why, Miss Elliot, we begin to hear strange things of you–(smiling in her face)–But you have not much the Look of it–as Grave as a little Judge.” –Anne blushed.–”Aye, aye, that will do. Now, it is right. I thought we were not mistaken.” She was left to guess at the direction of his Suspicions; –the first wild idea had been of some disclosure from his Br in law–but she was ashamed the next moment–& felt how far more probable that he should be meaning Mr E.–The door was opened–& the Man evidently beginning to deny his Mistress, when the sight of his Master stopped him. The Adml enjoyed the joke exceedingly. Anne thought his triumph over Stephen rather too long. At last however, he was able to invite her upstairs, & stepping before her said–”I will just go up with you myself & shew you in–. I cannot stay, because I must go to the P. Office, but if you will only sit down for 5 minutes I am sure Sophy will come–and you will find nobody to disturb you–there is nobody but Frederick here–” opening the door as he spoke.–Such a person to be passed over as a Nobody to her!–After being allowed to feel quite secure–indifferent–at her ease, to have it burst on her that she was to be the next moment in the same room with him!–No time for recollection!–for planning behaviour, or regulating manners!–There was time only to turn pale, before she had passed through the door, & met the astonished eyes of Capt. W—. who was sitting by the fire pretending to read & prepared for no greater surprise than the Admiral’s hasty return…..
There was time for all this to pass–with such Interruptions only as enhanced the charm of the communication–and Bath cd scarcely contain any other two Beings at once so rationally & so rapturously happy as during that eveng occupied the Sopha of Mrs Croft’s Drawing room in Gay St.
Jane Austen was famously unsatisfied with this scene and reworked it, making the scene of the presentation of The Letter and the reconciliation of Anne and Frederick take place in the Musgrove’s rooms at the White Hart Inn and let it continue on through the walk through Bath up to the heights of Camden Place, through the Gravel Walk, a gentler incline than Gay Street as I’ve noted and also …the longer way around….perfect for reconciling lovers who have been apart for far too long;-)
Jane Austen first visited Bath in 1797, staying with her uncle, James Leigh Perrot and his wife at their home in Paragon. They spent every winter in Bath, to take the waters and enjoy the fashionable social life there.
No letters that Jane Austen wrote survive for that year -1797- and so we have little evidence of her first impressions of Bath.
We can, however, guess that she saw things in this crowded, fashionable place with her unerringly clear eye for it was in 1798-99 that she wrote what was to become Northanger Abbey,a satire not only on the rage for Horrid books, but also on the busy but ultimately vacuous life to be found in Bath, husband hunting, shopping and entering into the round of fashionable entertainments…
However, some of her letters written during her second stay in Bath do survive. She travelled to the spa to stay there in some style with her brother Edward, his wife and children, Fanny and Edward, and her mother, Mrs Austen, in number 2 on this annotated 1803 map of Bath (above-do click on it to enlarge it)- in Queen’s Square.
The Austen family’s arrival in Bath was noted in the Bath Chronicle for Thursday 23rd May , 1799. A “Mr and Mrs Austin”(sic) were noted among the new arrivals to the city. On arrival in the house, Jane immediately set down to write to her sister Cassandra and it is her letter of 17th May 1799 which provides us with much information about the house, number 13 on the south side of the square :
which was to be their base for their stay of just over a month:
Well, here we are at Bath; we got here about one o’clock, and have been arrived just long enough to go over the house, fix on our rooms, and be very well pleased with the whole of it.
(One of the buildings on the south side of Queen’s Square from John Wood’s Description of Bath etc.,1765)
Queens Square was one of the first parts of Bath to be developed in the early 18th century by the architect, John Wood. It took seven years to complete – from 1728-1736- and was the first stage in the creation of the new Upper Town of Bath(the remainder was the creation of Gay Street and the Kings Circus). The concept behind the creation of the square was to provide a unifying façade to the houses so that they looked like one massive mansion on the south facing side (and indeed this range did contain a very large house for John Wood himself)
Walter Ison in his magnificently detailed book The Georgian Buildings of Bath writes about the development:
Queens Square is sited to the north-west of the old city boundaries on the high southward sloping ground which Robert Gay granted to John Wood in a series of 99 year leases…Wood envisaged the north, east and west ranges of buildings as forming a palace forecourt, the ensemble to be viewed from the south side. The magnificent north front, elaborately modeled to gain the fullest advantage of light and shade offered by a south aspect, fully realizes the body of this supposed palace, to which the east and west sides were to form wings…While the east side was carried out to this design at an early date, circumstances arose later which prevented Wood from building the complementary range. The buildings on the west side eventually took the form of a large mansion…The south side was built more or less in accordance with Wood’s original intentions
This is the plan of the square from Wood’s own book which detailed the history and the early 18th century architectural innovations designed by him, A Description of Bath etc ( 1765)
Jane Austen was pleased with the house, characteristically noting it quirks along with its good points:
We are exceedingly pleased with the house; the rooms are quite as large as we expected. Mrs. Bromley is a fat woman in mourning, and a little black kitten runs about the staircase. Elizabeth (Edward’s wife-jfw) has the apartment within the drawing-room; she wanted my mother to have it, but as there was no bed in the inner one, and the stairs are so much easier of ascent, or my mother so much stronger than in Paragon as not to regard the double flight, it is settled for us to be above, where we have two very nice-sized rooms, with dirty quilts and everything comfortable. I have the outward and larger apartment, as I ought to have; which is quite as large as our bedroom at home, and my mother’s is not materially less. The beds are both as large as any at Steventon, and I have a very nice chest of drawers and a closet full of shelves — so full indeed that there is nothing else in it, and it should therefore be called a cupboard rather than a closet, I suppose.
She also very much preferred the views over the square towards the rising ground of the Upper Town, to the rather enclosed and dark situation of her uncle’s house in the Paragon:
I like our situation very much; it is far more cheerful than Paragon, and the prospect from the drawing-room window, at which I now write, is rather picturesque, as it commands a prospective view of the left side of Brock Street, broken by three Lombardy poplars in the garden of the last house in Queen’s Parade.
Though she didn’t mention it, Jane Austen’s view across the square also took in the small square of grass in the centre of the square and its obelisk, commemorating Frederick, Prince of Wales the father of George III:
Queen’s Square is charmingly situated and composed of elegant buildings which display all the grandeur of architectural excellence. It was designed by Wood, to whose professional taste and spirit Bath owes so much. In the area is a pleasure-ground, enclosed by iron palisades, adorned in the centre with an obelisk seventy feet high shaped and pointed like a bookbinders needle and charged with the following inscription:
In memory of humours conferred,
And in gratitude
For benefits bestowed
In this city
By his Royal Highness
FREDERICK PRINCE OF WALES
and his
ROYAL CONSORT
in the year MDCCXXXVII.
This Obelisk is erected
by RICHARD NASH esq,
(See The Guide to all the Watering and Sea -bathing Places etc (1803) by John Feltham)
For Mrs Austen,the Square-so called for it was the first of the important squares to be built in Bath, remained THE place to stay: in 1801 when they were trying to find somewhere to live in Bath upon the Reverend George Austen’s retirement, Jane wrote almost despairingly to Cassandra that:
My mother hankers after The Square dreadfully and it is but natural to suppose my Uncle will take her part…
(Letter to Cassandra Austen, dated 21st January 1801)
Of course by the time Jane Austen was writing Persuasion – in 1815-16- The Square was one of the oldest of the new developments in Bath: it was far more fashionable to live higher up in the new town with its crescents and pleasant outlooks across the city and the river. Which allowed her to make a small joke at her mother’s expense when the fashionably minded Musgrove girls declare that Queens Square is too old-fashioned for them to contemplate as a place to stay in Bath for the winter season:
I hope we shall be in Bath in the winter; but remember, papa, if we do go, we must be in a good situation: none of your Queen-squares for us!
Persuasion, Chapter 6
The Austen’s stay in Bath ended in late June and Jane Austen returned to Steventon-away from the glare of Bath in the summer. And she could joke to Cassandra that she had better prepare a good meal for them as they were used to high level of living in Bath:
You must give something very nice for we are used to live well
(See Letter to Cassandra dated 19th June 1799)
I daresay had she been presented only with a dish of bread and cheese, the fact that she was back in her beloved Steventon home would have made it seem like a feast.
Like this:
This is a map of Bath as it was in 1803 from my copy of John Feltham’s Guide to all the Watering and Sea-Bathing Places etc, of that year, and I have annotated with the locations of places very much associated with Jane Austen-and ones that we shall be visiting over the next few days. You can, as ever, click on the map to enlarge it.
They are as follows:
1. Walcot Church
2. Queen’s Square
3. The Paragon
4. Sydney Place
5. Green Park Buildings
6. Gay Street
7. Trim Street
8. Great Pultney Street
Jane Austen lived in Bath from 1801-1806. During this time her father had died and was buried there and the Austen ladies - Cassandra, Mrs Austen and Jane- had begun to realise exactly what living as quite poor, dependant, unmarried and widowed women meant in the early 19th century…Her intimate know ledge of Bath was used to great effect in her novels Northanger Abbey and Persuasion, where Bath is a ’character” of the novels in its own right. Eventually in 1806 the Austen ladies left bath, visited nearby Clifton and took a summer tour of relatives in Gloucestershire, Warwickshire and Staffordshire before settling in Southampton.
Prior to settling in the city in 1801 Jane Austen had visited Bath, staying at Queen’s Square and it is there that we will begin our tour of Austen related sites in Bath in the next post. Do join me, won’t you?
So, tonight PBS airs Persuasion starring Rupert Penry-Jones and Sally Hawkins. This is not my favourite adaptation of Persuasion, sadly, not by any stretch of the imagination. No, my favourite is Nick Dear’s wonderfully atmospheric film which first appeared in 1995. The latest version contains too many oddities and anachronisms for my addled brain to compute. Too many to list here. And the sight of poor Anne Elliot running up and down the incredibly steep Bath terrain was (unintentionally) hilarious rather than touching to my eyes, I’m afraid.
Still, each to his or her own.
So, tomorrow we begin a new season and as we have concentrated on the novels recently I thought it was time to give some space to the woman who so inspired us. So from tomorrow, for a few days, we will concentrate on Jane;-)
The season will begin with my first post written by a Guest Blogger, Karen of Bookish NYC, who will be reviewing the Morgan Library of New York’s exhibition devoted to entirely to Jane Austen- A Woman’s Wit: Jane Austen’s Life and Legacy
I do hope you will join me.
Sophie Croft is possibly my favourite of all Jane Austen’s female characters. Intelligent, kind, shewd, witty and self sufficient(as long as she is near the Admiral).
Mrs. Croft, though neither tall nor fat, had a squareness, uprightness, and vigour of form, which gave importance to her person. She had bright dark eyes, good teeth, and altogether an agreeable face; though her reddened and weather-beaten complexion, the consequence of her having been almost as much at sea as her husband, made her seem to have lived some years longer in the world than her real eight-and-thirty. Her manners were open, easy, and decided, like one who had no distrust of herself, and no doubts of what to do; without any approach to coarseness, however, or any want of good humour.
Pesruasion,Chapter 6
She is very much part of the Admiral’s world and their relationship is one of the most balanced and loving in all Jane Austens works:
The Crofts knew quite as many people in Bath as they wished for, and considered their intercourse with the Elliots as a mere matter of form, and not in the least likely to afford them any pleasure. They brought with them their country habit of being almost always together. He was ordered to walk to keep off the gout, and Mrs. Croft seemed to go shares with him in everything, and to walk for her life to do him good. Anne saw them wherever she went. Lady Russell took her out in her carriage almost every morning, and she never failed to think of them, and never failed to see them. Knowing their feelings as she did, it was a most attractive picture of happiness to her. She always watched them as long as she could, delighted to fancy she understood what they might be talking of, as they walked along in happy independence, or equally delighted to see the Admiral’s hearty shake of the hand when he encountered an old friend, and observe their eagerness of conversation when occasionally forming into a little knot of the navy, Mrs. Croft looking as intelligent and keen as any of the officers around her.
Persuasion Chapter 18
And of course, Mrs Croft is the most travelled of any of Jane Austen’s female characters:
“What a great traveller you must have been, ma’am!” said Mrs. Musgrove to Mrs. Croft.
“Pretty well, ma’am, in the fifteen years of my marriage; though many women have done more. I have crossed the Atlantic four times, and have been once to the East Indies and back again, and only once; besides being in different places about home: Cork, and Lisbon, and Gibraltar. But I never went beyond the Streights, and never was in the West Indies. We do not call Bermuda or Bahama, you know, the West Indies.”
Persuasion Chapter 8
(Map of the East Indies circa 1805 from my collection, not included in the book. Please click to enlarge it)
And it is her travels that interest me, for this recently published book, Birds of Passage edited by Nancy K Shields, details just the type of journeying Mrs Corft would have undertaken when she traveled to the East Indies, via the cape of Good Hope. I have been waiting since Christmas for the oportunity to tell you of this book. I thought today was perfect timing with the airing of Persuasion on PSB tonight.
Birds of Passage records the journey to India made by Lady Henrietta Clive- seen on the cover of the book, above as portrayed by Sir Joshua Reynolds- and her two daughters, Harry (Hernitetta) and Charly (Charlotte). She was married to Lord Edward Clive, son of Clive of India. Lord Edward was Governor of Madras. Accompanying them on their journey was the children’s governess, Anna Tonelli, and her paintings of the places they encountered on the whole expedition illustrate this book.
This is one of the Government House and Council Chamber in Madras.
The book consists of extracts from Lady Henrietta’s diaries and letters written to her brother, Geroge Herbert, second Earl of Powis, a rather Byronic figure. Extracts from Charly’s journals are also presented. They detail the journeys to and from the East Indies, stopping at the Cape of Good Hope en-route, and at St Helena on the return journey to England.
(Simon’s Bay, the Cape of Good Hope)
When in India Lady Henrietta and her children made a journey of over 1000 miles from Madras via Bangalore, Mysore, Coimatoor,Tranquebar and Ponidcherry, returning to Madras seven months later. Her aim was to see the recently conquered Seringapatam and the remains of Tipu Sultan’s capital – the fall of which was part of the foruth Anglo-Mysore cmpaagin. In 1799 the English Army had attacked Seringapatam. Lady Henrietta’s original plans to vist Seringupatam were postponed by Lord Mornington- Wellington’s brother, and the Governor General of India-a difficult character by Lady Hernietta’s account.
The journals are chock full of interest for those of us who like the teeny-tiny details of life in the early 19th century, and are of extra special interest to those of us who adore Mrs Croft, for naturally Lady Henrietta chronicles many of the sights, sounds and experiences that Mrs Corft must have shared.
The book recounts, in some great detail, life on board ship-sadly unlike Mrs Croft Lady Henrietta never felt entirely well while at sea. We accompany her while she learns Persian(the language of the India Courts) and she frequently expresses her exasperation with the limited role that women could play in this and indeed the wider world, dominated by men.
We learn from the journals what was considered to be essential travelling equipment in India for an aristocratic party: harp and pianoforte of course; fourteen elephants; a hundred bullocks to carry provisions and, not forgetting a train of camels which were essential for the delivery of express messages.
The trials if family and domestic life is also related. Unlike Sophie Croft, Lady Henrietta’s marriage was not entirely happy. Lord Edward Clive was not at all lively and was a poor intellectual match for his spirited wife. As Wellington noted-he was also part of their world in India, leading the British Army’s campaign against Tipu Sultan- Lord Edward was :
A mild moderate and remarkably reserved man having a bad delivery and apparently heavy understanding…
We learn of Lady Hernitta’s maid becoming pregnant as a result of a dalliance with an officer and discretion is the key: mother and prospective child are treated with utmost kindness, a way life for them both being provided by Henrietta, and discretion at home in England being insisted upon by Henrietta to save the poor girl’s reputation. She thinks very ill of the officer involved indeed.
She was, of course, viewing India from the standpoint of 18th century British colonialists: this is not a treatise on the Indian way of life, but notes of the lives of British in India. She was interested in the people, the flora and fauna, their religion and language but clearly on her terms. In no way did she “go native” as you can see from this small extract:
March 16th 1800
We breakfasted in the commanding officer’s fort -house..I went at seven o’clock to the fort and an old pagoda, magnificent and well carved, constructed of granite now converted into a military storehouse. The sculpture is much better than any I have yet seen, some of the open work is extremely neat and well executed…I breakfasted at the commanding officer’s house and afterwards the Princes came to see me…The Padshaw begin a legitimate son is extremely interesting. I understand that Col Wellesley was much pleased with his manners in Seringapatam….
(Map of India circa 1815 from my collection)
That being said, I adored this book, and was grateful for the glossary explaining the Indian words Lady Henrietta used often. If anything is lacking I would say it is some more explanatory footnotes…but then I’ve been thoroughly spoiled by the extreme notation of the excellent Deirdre le Faye;-)
This book is a bargain. Buy it and revel in the fascinating details with which Lady Henrietta regales us: of the plants she collects and sees, the travails of travel by sea-leaks, mutinies, prize taking-all are recounted here; the strangeness of travel within India itself; the social life of the British at the Cape and in India all of which would have been familiar to my favourite Austen lady, Sophie Croft.
You may have realised by now that I like to know the teeny-tiny details of social history…How exactly did people make a whipp’t syllabub ? What exactly did having a putrid throat mean? How was it treated? The list is endless…Hence this blog.
But I confess that until I read Dr Helen Doe’s fascinating book Enterprising Women and Shipping in the Nineteenth Century, I had not really given a second thought to how the ships on which Captains Benwick, Wentworth and Harville ( not to mention Admiral Croft) sailed to war were actually created. And not for one moment did I consider that among the shipyard owners would be some amazing women who were not only owning the yards but were hands-on running some of the ship yards that created the British naval fleet of the early 19th century, managing complex business scenarios, and importantly, ordering labouring and professional men.
Dr Doe’s book is a tour de force. A very readable and detailed overview of the ship making process, the communities that surrounded the shipyards, the law relating to women- most of the female owner of ship yards inherited them from their husbands, ancillary maritime trades and the women who were involved in them.
The book does cover the whole of the 19th century and therefore a lot of the content, while of great interest, does not specifically have much relevance to Jane Austen’s era. But the chapters on warship builders and the detailed studies of shipyard owners such as Mrs Frances Barnard of Deptford are engrossing.
(Remember you can click on the picture above- not included in the book,sadly-and all the illustrations in this post to enlarge them.)
The story of Mrs Mary Ross of Rochester, Kent (below) is, to me, a revelation.
The most prominent business in a maritime community was the shipyard. It was physically large, noisy and used a large amount of labour and on its output rested may other businesses such as sailmakers, ropemakers and blockmakers. The largest yards were major industrial concerns in their time directly employing hundreds of men…The building of warships was high value and high risk to the shipbuilder and the peak time for navy contracts with merchant yards was during the French revolutionary and the Napoleonic wars.
Frances Barnard inherited her shipyard form her husband in 1760,and it was one of the foremost yards on the Thames at Southwark. She eventually retired from the business in 1803. Mary Ross inherited her ship yard from her husband in 1808. Mary took control of the yard, showing amazing business acumen and skill. Dealing with the rather slippery Navy Board could be difficult: she managed it with aplomb.
This book will alter your perceptions of genteel women in our era. Once widowed they resolved not to live the life of a poor dependant widow ,but with practical sense and intelligence ran shipyards- for profit. Rational creatures indeed.
Admittedly, this is a very expensive book, but I have to say as someone who is not that keen on reading about matters maritime ( low be it spoken), I found it fascinating. The depth of detail is so just so satisfying to read. Dr Doe, a Fellow of the Centre for Maritime Historical Studies at the University of Exeter, leaves virtually no stone unturned in her attempt to convey to us that, in our era, the term a woman in business did not automatically mean that this woman was a milliner or a manuta maker.
“Well, mother, I have done something for you that you will like. I have been to the theatre, and secured a box for to-morrow night. A’n't I a good boy? I know you love a play; and there is room for us all. It holds nine. I have engaged Captain Wentworth. Anne will not be sorry to join us, I am sure. We all like a play. Have not I done well, mother?”
Persuasion Chapter 22
When Jane Austen wrote about attending the theatre in Bath in Persuasion the old Orchard Street theatre in Bath had been closed for some years. Its last performance was on the 13th July 1805.
As we have seen in a previous AustenOnly post, this small theatre, during its fifty year history, built a solid reputation for good if not excellent performances, and had established itself as the best and most influential provincial theatre, rivalling the two London patent theatres-Covent Garden and Drury Lane-for the quality of its performances, actors and actresses.
No, in Persuasion, Jane Austen was writing about the theatre that replaced it, the Theatre Royal, Beaufort Square.
Here is a map of Bath in 1803 from my copy of A Guide to all the Watering and Sea-Bathing Places(1803) by John Feltham:
And this is a section of it which shows the position of the new theatre:
Proposals to build a new theatre in Bath to replace the tiny, old-fashioned Orchard Street theatre were first mooted in 1802. In August 1804 a final decision was taken to build a larger, modern theatre on land forming the south side of Beaufort Square. Here is part of the history of the old theatre and the decision to build a new theatre from A Guide to all the Watering Places etc (1816):
The liberal and enterprising spirit of Mr John Palmer, father to the yet more entertaining and truly amiable John Palmer Esq. and grandfather of one of the present representatives of his native place, prompted him, amidst various other extensive concerns and speculations, to engage very deeply in the risk and expense of building a new and commodious theatre here, which had long been extremely wanted. In 1760 he obtained His Majesty’s patent for this purpose; and from him the property devolved on his son (the late amiable and intelligent gentleman who invented and successfully carried into execution the popular plan for the improvement of the posts of this kingdom by mail coaches etc), who rebuilt and considerably enlarged the house and, having connected the Bristol theatre with it, disposed of the greater part of that valuable concern. The old theatre at Bath was superior to any out of the metropolis; when the increasing population of Bath, and the rank of the company, seemed to require a new one, more capacious than the old and to which the access should be more commodious.
The funds needed to build the theatre were raised by way of a tontine. The tontine-named after Lorenzo Toni a Neapolitan banker who introduced this device- worked in this way: members of the tontine bought shares, and when they died their shares were shared between the surviving members of the tontine, and in theory the last standing survivor inherited it all.
On hundred first shares were issued of the theatre tontine, each costing £200 each. Each shareholder received income on that share of 3 per cent per annum, plus free admission to all performances at the theatre once it was built. A secondary issue of shares at a price of £150 per share did not entitle the holders to free admission, just to the income.
The subscribers to the shares included the great and the good. And the not – so – good .The Prince of Wales headed the list along with his brother, the Duke of York.
The foundation stone of the theatre was laid in 1804 and less than a year later the building, built in accordance with a design by George Dance, then the professor of architecture at the Royal Academy, was complete:
The following description of the sumptuous new theatre appeared in The Beauties of England and Wales (Volume XIII) by Edward Weylake Brayley and John Britton:
There are three entrances, in as many directions, the grand front being in Beaufort Square. The audience part is somewhere less than that of the late Covent Garden Theatre, but the space behind the curtain is much larger. The length, within the main walls is on hundred and twenty feet; and breadth, sixty feet; and the height seventy.
The exterior buildings including dressing rooms, scene room, wardrobe and every other convenience for the artistes, servants etc; the ante rooms and saloons to the boxes, rooms to the numerous private boxes; taverns etc ; are very extensive.
There are three tiers of boxes excessively lofty and affording a depth of rows towards the centre.
Cast iron bronze pillars are placed at a distance of two feet from the front, by which the first row of each circle appears as a balcony, independent of the main structure, and as inconceivable lightness is communicated to the tout ensemble.
The private boxes are inclosed with gilt lattices; the entrance to them is by a private house, part of the property connected with the theatre, and they are accommodated with a suite of retiring rooms.
The decorations are very splendid, particularly the ceiling, which is divided into four compartments, each of which is adorned by one of those exquisite paintings by Cassali, formerly belonging to Fonthill ,Wiltshire.
The wreathes of flowers etc which connect these paintings are executed with great skill and taste. The walls are covered with stamped cloth stuffed of a crimson colour and are papered above to the tops of the boxes with paper of the same colour; and Egyptian pattern fringed with gold stripe. The seats and edges of the boxes are also covered with cloth. The front is painted of the same colour with four broad stripes of gold and the centre ornamented with tasteful scrolls of gold.
This is the description from A Guide to all the Watering and Sea Bathing Places (1816) by John Feltham:
The whole south side of Beaufort-square was accordingly purchased in 1804, and such was the activity employed that in twelve months a theatre was opened, which, in elegance of structure, and magnificence of decoration, may vie with any in Great Britain. Its size is considerably larger than that of the little theatre in the Haymarket, being one hundred and twenty-five feet in length, sixty wide and seventy high. Four private boxes are taken from the first tier, on each side next the stage, and handsomely fitted up. There is an air of warmth,comfort and ease, about the house, not to be found in any other theatre in England; and two of the back rows of the front boxes, with similar conveniences as in many of the theatres in Italy. The scenery and stage-apparatus are not inferior to those of the London houses, and the actors are considerably the best out of the metropolis.
The Bristol theatre now belongs entirely to the same proprietors and it is needless to observe that these theatres have been long held next in consideration to those of London; and that there have arisen under their fostering care, the greatest ornaments of the British stage: we need enumerate only the names of Henderson, King, Edwin, Abingdon, Crawford, Siddons, Murray, Incledon and Kean; and though last, certainly not least in the esteem of the public, Elliston.
When the company is at Bristol, the performances are on Mondays Wednesdays and Fridays there and on the Saturday at bath; and, during the season at the latter place, the performances are on Monday at Bristol and Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays at Bath…
As you can imagine from the descriptions, the new theatre was altogether a very different and larger theatre than the intimate Orchard Street playhouse where Henry Tilney really has no excuse for not seeing Catherine Morland in Northanger Abbey.
Let’s compare the interiors. Here is the Orchard Street theatre drawn by Rowlandson circa 1790:
And here is the interior of the Beaufort Square theatre, ready for a ball, circa 1820.
It was much larger,and very ornate, as you can see. Do remember you can enlarge all the illustrations here merely by clicking on them. The new theatre had its first performance on 12th October 1805, nine days before the battle of Trafalgar.
This is the playbill for that opening night. Sadly, it was a flop- the role of Richard III was given, rather unwisely as it turned out, to an unknown actor who was overcome with stage fright and forgot his words….Poor soul.
Jane Austen was living in 1805 at 25 Gay Street, where the Austen ladies lived after the death of Mr Austen. In 1806 they lived in temporary accommodation in Trim Street- both not far from the new theatre as you can see on this map.
The theatre is still in existance, though it is somewhat changed from Jane Austen’s day for it was destroyed by fire in 1862: go here to see it as it now appears.
Back to Persuasion….
Sadly because of the prior engagement at the Elliot’s evening party the Musgroves and Anne could not go to see a play at the relatively new Bath theatre. Charles Musgrove is not impressed:
“Phoo! phoo!” replied Charles, “what’s an evening- party? Never worth remembering. Your father might have asked us to dinner, I think, if he had wanted to see us. You may do as you like, but I shall go to the play.”
He is eventually persuaded to go to the Elliot’s…..My sympathies are with him. I’d much rather have spent time in congeal company at the theatre than spend a night-with not even a dinner in sight- in the company of the coldly elegant Elizabeth and the idiotic, egotistical Sir Walter…not to mention Mrs Clay.
Of all the family, Mary was probably the one most immediately gratified by the circumstance. It was creditable to have a sister married, and she might flatter herself with having been greatly instrumental to the connexion, by keeping Anne with her in the autumn; and as her own sister must be better than her husband’s sisters, it was very agreeable that Captain Wentworth should be a richer man than either Captain Benwick or Charles Hayter. She had something to suffer, perhaps, when they came into contact again, in seeing Anne restored to the rights of seniority, and the mistress of a very pretty landaulette; but she had a future to look forward to, of powerful consolation.
Persuasion, Chapter 24
Typically, in one small passage, Jane Austen gives us a lot of information about Anne Wentworth (as she now is), her husband’s essential nature and that of her sister Mary.
Frederick Wentworth is shown to be a man of a generous and practical nature, but not without a certain wicked style.
For he gives his wife a very pretty Landaulette to enable her to be driven around the country and be independent when it came to travel.
This is what William Felton, London coachmaker has to say about this type of vehicle in his Treatise on Carriages etc (1797):
A Landaulet or Demi-Landau.
This carriage has the same advantage as the landau only that the number of passengers are proportionally less; but, for convenience, where only one carriage is kept, none exceeds it for country use.
This was quite an expensive two-seater vehicle and a rather impressive gift on Captain Wentworth’s part.
(Do remember- to enlarge all these illustrations in order to make the detail easier to read, just click on them)
Mr Felton gives the cost of a new one, fitted out with all the top level furnishings and finishes, at £156, 10 shillings and 3 pence. In addition to the purchase cost, it also required the services of a coachman,
and perhaps also a groom( though the two jobs could be combined) and a footman, if he was employed by the Wentworths, could also stand on the back to accompany his mistress on her journeys.
Note that this is also a rather grand gesture by Frederick Wentworth. Employing male servants at the time incurred an extra tax: they were therefore a ‘luxury’ for from 1777 onwards an annual tax of a guinea was imposed on households that employed one male servant. The rate increased with the number of make servants one kept. This tax remained in force( thought it was modified occasionally) until 1937.
And of course, in addition to the cost of male employees, the Wentworths would have to factor in the cost of stabling the horses which would draw the carriage.
Sandy Lerner, the chatelaine of Chawton House, in her article in The Female Spectator Volume 4 number 1 has this to say about Wentworth’s gift:
This light four-wheeled conveyance gained popularity as it was well suited to England’s uncertain climate in that it could be converted from an open to a closed carriage with little trouble. The landaulette was a smaller version of the landau, a very formal postillion driven vehicle. The landaulette was also known as a demi-Landau with only a rear seat. Again this is a lady’s vehicle, and its inclusion denotes Captain Wentworth’s extreme generosity to his wife as well as a remarkable concern for her independence
William Bridges Adams in his book English Pleasure Carriages (1837) remarks that these vehicle ,along with their close-cousins landaus, were rather expensive to maintain in good order:
This is an expensive carriage to build and very liable to get out of order as the leather and wood work of the head is affected by cold and heat, damp and dryness. The expense of repairs is considerable.
So, this gift on Wentworth’s part to his wife of a very pretty landaulette was one made with much consideration for her ability tot ravel independently, in safety, and in some considerable style at no little extra cost to himself.
A much more practical carriage than Charles Musgrove’s curricle, being an all weather vehicle. Small- only a two-seater- but very stylish,with its moveable roof, perfect for summer driving.
In effect, Wentworth has given Anne the equivalent of a luxury convertible sports car.
And it rankles with Mary because she (and we !) know that she only has the services of Charles’s rather masculine and impractical curricle to call upon. No wonder she sees Anne’s gift through the green eyes of jealousy.
And now to Extravagant Monsters. We know that Sir Walter Elliot has to retrench and leave Kellynch Hall, tenanted out to the far superior ( in every way)Admiral and Mrs Croft, but does he leave Kellynch for Bath in any penitent style?
Of course not.
The last office of the four carriage-horses was to draw Sir Walter, Miss Elliot, and Mrs. Clay to Bath. The party drove off in very good spirits; Sir Walter prepared with condescending bows for all the afflicted tenantry and cottagers who might have had a hint to shew themselves: and Anne walked up at the same time, in a sort of desolate tranquillity, to the Lodge, where she was to spend the first week.
Persuasion, Chapter 5
Four carriage horses draw Sir Walter’s coach, note. Not two…four.He could never be expected to retrench that far….And can you imagine what sort of coach it might be? Not a serviceable comfortable coach like the Musgrove’s might own, I fear, but one like this, again from William Felton’s Treatise.
An Elegant Crane Neck Coach
Which would cost at least £337 pounds (gasp!) fitted with every conceivable luxurious extra…
.
In addition no doubt the panels of the coach were emblazoned with Sir Walter’s arms and emblems, as garish as his servant’s livery…..
Oh, yes, I’m sure his tenants and cottagers were impressed as he rode away, in his grand extravagant coach pulled by four horse with coachman and footmen galore, retrenching like mad….Don’t you think?
There are numerous mentions of carriages in Persuasion, and if we examine them they are very interesting: considering the owners and their choices of carriage reveals much about their essential characters.
Today we shall consider Charles Musgrove and his curricle. The existence of which so irritates his wife, Mary…well, to be fair, it is not its sole existence which irritates her but their lack of a coach.
Let me explain further. To Curricles…..Dashing, wealthy young men owned them in the late 18th /early 19th centuries and this was reflected in Jane Austen’s books. Darcy had one in Pride and Prejudice, Henry Tilney had one in Northanger Abbey, Mr Rushworth ( not dashing but very rich) in Mansfield Park; Willoughby (not rich but deceptively dashing – boo, hiss- )owned one in Sense and Sensibility. Mr Elliot, in Persuasion, also owns one, though he is driven in his by his servant, properly kitted out in mourning for Mr Elliot’s dead but unlamented wife :
They had nearly done breakfast, when the sound of a carriage (almost the first they had heard since entering Lyme) drew half the party to the window. It was a gentleman’s carriage, a curricle, but only coming round from the stable-yard to the front door — somebody must be going away. It was driven by a servant in mourning.
The word curricle made Charles Musgrove jump up, that he might compare it with his own; the servant in mourning roused Anne’s curiosity, and the whole six were collected to look by the time the owner of the curricle was to be seen issuing from the door, amidst the bows and civilities of the household, and taking his seat, to drive off.
Persuasion, Chapter 12
They were smart, fashionable carriages and gave the young man the opportunity to drive himself ….an opportunity to show the world that he knew how to do these things in style and was a competent sort of chap.
Sandy Lerner, the chatelaine of Chawton House and noted carriage owner/driver, wrote this interesting passage about curricles in The Female Spectator ,Volume 4, Issue 1 (Winter 2000):
The curricle was a conspicuous display of wealth and fashion analogous to the ownership of a high-priced, 2-seater convertible sports car. It was an unnecessary and expensive addition to an establishment as one necessarily had at least one other traveling all-weather vehicle. Also called a “bankrupt cart” because in the words of a contemporary judge they were “frequently driven by those who could afford neither the Money to support them nor the Time spent in using them, the want of which in their Business, brought them to Bankruptcy”. It was a young person’s vehicle noted for its lightness and speed, especially as it was drawn by two horses.
In Pride and Prejudice ”when the sound of a carriage drew them to a window, and they saw a gentleman and lady in a curricle driving up the street. Elizabeth, immediately recognising the livery, guessed what it meant, and imparted no small degree of surprise to her relations by acquainting them with the honour which she expected.” Mr Darcy is, in one word, portrayed as stylish wealthy and competent.
The curricle shown above was designed by William Felton. He was a coach-maker, of 36, Leather Lane, Holborn, London and the illustration (along with all the others in this post) comes from my copy of his Treatise on Carriages, published in 1794
This is how he describes a curricule and its owners (and frankly sounds a little blase about the type of customers this vehicle attracted :
The proprietors of this sort of carriage are in general persons of high repute for fashion and who are continually of themselves, inventing some improvements, the variety of which would be too tedious to relate
In his book he estimated the cost of a new curricle at between £58, 9 shillings and 3 pence and £,103, 5 shillings depending on the finish and extras added to it.
And now we can see a little more clearly one of Charles and Mary Musgrove’s problems: Charles has a curricle ( a rich man’s plaything) …but as they have a growing family, they really needed not a flash sports car but a “people carrier” -a coach- in order to travel around all year in the countryside without constantly having to rely on the goodwill of Mr and Mrs Musgrove.
“I am very glad you were well enough, and I hope you had a pleasant party.”
“Nothing remarkable. One always knows beforehand what the dinner will be, and who will be there; and it is so very uncomfortable, not having a carriage of one’s own. Mr. and Mrs. Musgrove took me, and we were so crowded! They are both so very large, and take up so much room; and Mr. Musgrove always sits forward. So there was I crowded into the back seat with Henrietta and Louisa; and I think it very likely that my illness to-day may be owing to it.”
Persuasion, Chapter 5
Mr and Mrs Musgrove senior own a coach-a good all-weather vehicle that can carry at least four, plus lots of luggage when they travel about the country.
This is Felton’s design for a plain coach and this is what he has to say about it:
Where only one carriage is kept, and the use of it is almost constantly required, a plain, substantial coach is to be recommended, in preference to a slight ornamental one: as by being exposed to all weathers and rough roads it is less liable to require expensive repairs and if well formed and neatly executed in the finishing, will always preserve a genteel appearance: in this pattern of a coach there is nothing superfluous or wanting to make it complete; and for convenience may be considered as one of the cheapest of all four wheeled carriages.
A coach commissioned from Felton would cost at least £133, 9 shillings.
Mary Musgrove is, in my very humble opinion more than a little justified in saying that it is very disagreeable not having a carriage “of their own”. The curricle is hardly a practical all-year-round vehicle: it cannot comfortably hold more than two passengers and has limited capacity for carrying luggage as non can be stored on the roof for it is in effect, a soft top which cannot bear a load. Living in the country where the effects of the weather would be more keenly felt than in a city, a good plain coach would surely make her more mobile and comfortable. She cheers up immensely when “tending” Louisa in off-season Lyme:
Mary had had her evils; but upon the whole, as was evident by her staying so long, she had found more to enjoy than to suffer. Charles Hayter had been at Lyme oftener than suited her; and when they dined with the Harvilles there had been only a maid-servant to wait, and at first Mrs. Harville had always given Mrs. Musgrove precedence; but then she had received so very handsome an apology from her on finding out whose daughter she was, and there had been so much going on every day, there had been so many walks between their lodgings and the Harvilles, and she had got books from the library, and changed them so often, that the balance had certainly been much in favour of Lyme. She had been taken to Charmouth too, and she had bathed, and she had gone to church, and there were a great many more people to look at in the church at Lyme than at Uppercross; and all this, joined to the sense of being so very useful, had made really an agreeable fortnight.
Persuasion, Chapter 14
I think a lot of her unhappiness stems from boredom and isolation. A coach would alleviate some of that by providing her with all year-round traveling opportunities. Felton himself advises that if only one carriage is to be owned ( by a family )it ought to be a good plain coach. You can clearly see why Charles wants a fashionable, smart curricle , as a fully paid up member of the ”Heirs to a Pretty Little Estate Club”.
But I think in this case you can see that he is being a little selfish and Mary Musgrove really is more than a little justified in saying that it is very disagreeable not having a carriage “of their own” .
Its rather like a 21st century man not wanting to sell his two- seater soft top Porsche when the family has grown and what they really need is a Citroen Picasso.
