A Taste for Pineapple…

     One of the blessings of living in south Florida is having the ability to grow fruit at home.  Right now, I have fresh pineapple in my refrigerator, another one ripe and ready to cut, and a third that is almost there.  From two that ripened earlier, I have two more plants started in pots that will be ready to plant in a few weeks.  There is nothing more delicious than fresh, sweet pineapple, and it’s even better when you can pick it in your own garden!  Near some of the pineapple plants is a lemon tree, which is covered with lemons ripening, as well as flowers.  The variety of lemon is Eureka, which produces a small yet powerful lemon, and which blooms and fruits with astonishing frequency.

     The taste for pineapple and citrus is by no means a modern taste.    Explorers were bringing specimens of exotic plants from all over the world during the age of exploration.  Portuguese explorers are credited with bringing sweet orange trees back from the orient to the Mediterranean area about 1500, although the Persian orange (which is bitter) was known in Italy as early as 1100.  Orange trees became a popular plant widely sought for terraces and formal gardens in France, Italy, Germany and England, and needed special protection from the northern climates.  Buildings called “orangeries” were constructed in France in the 17th century at Versailles and other sites..  At Kew Gardens in England, an orangery was built in 1761 by Sir William Chambers, which was the largest glass house in England at that time.

 

  A beautiful conservatory was also built for Carlton House by Thomas Hopper in 1807.  As you can see, these were restricted to royalty, the aristocracy and the very rich because of the price of glass, and taxes on glass.  Conservatories and orangeries at that time could be free-standing buildings, or glassed rooms attached to a stately home.  Because of cost, for all but the wealthiest, these structures did not contain nearly as much glass as a greenhouse would contain today.  Roofs were frequently solid (although possibly removable) or inset with only a glass panel, and the walls were more solid, inset with larger windows.  During the Regency era, the garden room was increasingly popular, as a transition from interior to exterior space.  The conservatory reached its hey-day in the Victorian era.

Exterior of Carlton House Conservatory by Thomas Hopper 1807

     The pineapple was introduced after Christopher Columbus first encountered it in 1493, and became hugely fashionable to display and enjoy for dinners by 18th century royalty and aristocracy.  This craze filtered down to the gentry.  However, the pineapple had certain special issues for cultivation: as a tropical fruit, it was not sufficient to protect them from frost; they also required more light than orange trees and most other exotics and a source of heat.  Pineapple cultivation was originally successful in the Netherlands, and English gardeners went to study the methods used there.  

     Heating was a real challenge.  Conservatories and orangeries were built facing south, to maximize exposure.  Angled glass was used to catch morning and afternoon sun, while deflecting the intensity of the mid-day sun.  However, pineapples required more warmth.  Early attempts with furnaces were not successful as fumes were toxic to the plants.  Hot air flues built into the walls were more successful, but the furnaces required constant attention and fires frequently broke out due to the build-up of soot and other material in the flues.  One solution was putting the potted plants into pits which were filled with a source of heat.  One substance used in these pits was manure, which generated heat but too intensely initially and then cooled too rapidly.  Oak bark in water resulted in a fermentation process which released heat at a slow and steady rate and allowed for more success.  Because of the special needs of the pineapple, a pinery could be located in an orangerie or conservatory, with a door allowing it to be closed off, or in a completely separate structure. 

      I  became interested in pineries because one appears in my work in progress (as well as the fact that I have pineapple plants myself!).  Although the term “pinery” is sometimes considered virtually interchangeable with “conservatory” and “orangery”, they are not in fact identical structures, although all are forerunners of the modern greenhouse.   The idea of a special structure in which to grow plants that require protection from cold weather  has existed for centuries.  The Roman emperor Tiberius had a “specularium” designed specifically to grow cucumbers out of season, with windows created from fragments of mica.  In France, records indicate a south-facing glass structure existed as early as 1385.

     Sources:

“The History of Greenhouses.” GardenGuides.com http://www.gardenguides.com/83595-history-greenhouses.html.  Viewed 4/15/2012.

 “Orangeries, Conservatories, Greenhouses and Glass Gardens.”  VictoriaHinshaw.com: http://www.victoriahinshaw.com./default.aspx?page=conservatories  viewed 3/24/2012 (as appeared in The Regency Plume, V. 12, N.3, P. 3 Sept.-Oct. 2002)

 Lausen-Higgins, Johanna.  “A TASTE FOR THE EXOTIC Pineapple cultivation in Britain.”  BuildingConservation.com              http://www.buildingconservation.com/articles/pineapples/pineapples.htm   Viewed 3/31/2012

Perry, Dr. Leonard.  “Orangeries and Greenhouses.”  University of Vermont Extension website.  http://perysperennials.info/articles/orangery.html  Viewed 3/31/2012

 Surchin, Anne.  “The beauty around us: from fad building to pleasure palace.”  (Date 3/22/2007,  Publication: VOX) Found on TheFreeLibrary.com http://www.thefreelibrary.com/_/print/PrintArticle.aspx?id=161397779   Viewed 3/31/2012

I also recommend M. M. Bennetts’ excellent article, The must-have garden accessories for the rich and richer? A glasshouse and pineapples!, posted April 26, 2012 in the English Historical Fiction Authors blog at http://englishhistoryauthors.blogspot.com/2012/04/must-have-garden-accessories-for-rich.html

A Trip Down Memory Lane to … Leeds Castle

Leeds Castle 2-24-1990 by me

      Today has been a grey, rainy day, so I looked at some photo albums.  One was of my first trip to England back in February of 1990.   I was there for two weeks, and had the most amazing time.  The first week was warmer than I expected, in the 50’s, and I was dazzled by the green grass, blooming crocuses, and wonderful scenery.  We visited Kew Gardens, Hampton Court (which I loved-I looked for the HA in the ceiling, commemorating Henry VIII’s marriage to Anne Boleyn!), the Victoria and Albert, had tea in an incredibly beautiful town called Shere.  However, a highlight of that visit was a trip to Leeds Castle in Kent. 

     Described by Lord Conway as “the loveliest castle in the world,” it is truly stunning.  The day we visited, the weather was starting to change (grey and colder) but the grounds were still lovely-as we walked through the park, we saw peacocks, geese, ducks and black swans; snowdrops, bluebells and crocus were blooming.  As we came around, we saw the castle, surrounded by a moat.  It was, in fact, the quintessential castle of my dreams.  We got there about 3:00pm, and the castle was to close at 5:00, so we had to hurry. 

A view of the castle from across the moat (also by me)

     After the Conquest, William I granted the lands where the Len widened around two small islands to Hamon de Crevecoeur; Hamon’s son Robert built the first stone castle on the site of an existing wooden castle, consisting of a keep and gatehouse (part of this survives).  Because the Crevecoeur family sided with Simon de Montfort, they were dispossessed by Henry III in 1265.  The castle was given to Roger de Leyburn.  The Crown bought it back in 1298.  

     The castle has been given to several queens: Edward I gave it to his 2nd wife, Margaret of France; Richard II gave it to his queen, Anne of Bohemia; Henry IV gave it to his 2nd wife, Joan of Navarre (Henry and Joan stayed there to avoid the plague in London).  Henry V gave it to Catherine of Valois; after Henry’s death, Catherine supposedly fell in love with and married Owen Tudor there.  In 1519, Henry VIII also altered the royal apartments and brought Catherine of Aragon. 

     The castle has its own chapel in the Gloriette Tower.  Edward I had mass said there daily after the death of Queen Eleanor.  This endowment was continued by Edward II, Richard II, Henry VI and Henry VII.    In 1978, the chapel was reconsecrated and made a Chapel Royal. 

     After leaving the castle, we visited the grotto.  This was built underground, using shells, bones, rocks, etc, to make stairs, pictures and so forth.  There is a seat at the very heart where one can watch the waterfall.  When we left the grotto, the temperature had dropped significantly.  We walked by the aviary, but could see nothing of the birds as it was quite chilly and already starting to get dark.    My only regret?  I was sorry we had not gotten there early enough to linger.  Leeds Castle was one of the highlights of my first visit to England.

Sources:

LEEDS CASTLE, MAIDSTONE, KENT. Tourist pamphlet 1989.

Phillips, Charles.  THE ILLUSTRATED ENCYCLOPEDIA OF ROYAL BRITAIN.  Metro Books: New York, 2009, 2011.

Wikipedia. Leeds Castle. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeds_Castle

InfoBritain.  Leeds Castle. http://www.infobritain.co.uk/Leeds_Castle.htm

LeedsCastle. http://www.leeds-castle.com/land.php

Jane Austen and Online Dating

Knowing I am interested in all things Austen, a dear friend sent me a newspaper clipping of an article from a local newspaper (yes, there are still people out there who read newspapers!).  The article, “Why Jane Austen would approve of online dating,” by Elizabeth Kantor, starts by asking if modern society has allowed these tools into areas that are not appropriate.  I am including the article here (click to enlarge):

Kantor, who wrote THE JANE AUSTEN GUIDE TO HAPPILY EVER AFTER, concludes that Jane Austen would in fact approve.   In her discussion, she points out that assembly balls provided a place where introductions could be performed after the various issues of concern could be weighed.  Kantor shows out that the internet sites do allow a screening process so that introductions are made based on similar values, interests, tastes and so forth.  As I understand it, the online service takes the place of the master of ceremonies, lady patroness or other person in charge of the gathering.  I was rather astonished by the idea of Miss Austen approving until I read the section where she mentioned that California’s attorney general got Match.com, eHarmony and Sparks Networks to start doing background checks (protecting clients against identity theft, and potential assault).  All things considered, I am rather inclined to agree with her conclusion.  If viewed properly, and used prudently, these sites allow people to meet who have been screened for basic criteria, with a view to a possible long-term relationship.  Once introduced, it is up to the parties to take it from there.   Not significantly different from the assembly ball!  If the online dating process is conducted thoughtfully and decorously, I believe that Miss Austen WOULD approve!  What do you think?

The Work In Progress Is Progressing…

I have finally fought my way out of one chapter into another! Periodically, I hit a section where it seems to go on forever. However, it is moving forward again. My characters are once again moving in a direction I had not previously considered, but it fits well with my plan. (Editing notes are also growing apace, as there are some rough spots that will need smoothing and some overgrowth that will need trimming!)
All in all, satisfactory!

My Spring Garden

I’ve just come in from working outside. This is an absolutely beautiful Florida spring day-warm, sunny, with a nice breeze. I’ve had cardinals, painted buntings, doves and blue jays on the feeder and yelling at me for disturbing them.
Eggplant, tomatoes and red bell peppers are snug in their 5-gallon pots, freshly fertilized and watered. All the herbs have had some fresh soil and fertilizer worked in around them. Five pineapple plants have fruit on them, and the roses have been fed.

 

This is my first year to try vegetables in pots, so I’m very hopeful that we will actually have tomatoes that taste like tomatoes this year! I will have to be vigilant as the squirrels are very determined adversaries, and seem to think that I grow things for especially for them!

Having grown up in the midwest, this is the time of year that I miss the spring flowers: crocus, tulips, forsythia, lilies of the valley, lilacs, etc. However, my roses and hibiscus are blooming, my herbs and pineapples doing beautifully, and the frangipani are bursting with leaves while I watch.  The tropical wisteria has bloomed gorgeously already and is beginning to bloom again.  Here is a picture of it at it’s very best from a couple of springs ago:

My garden is definitely not the same as the northern gardens I grew up with, or the English gardens I love to see.  However, the pleasures are the same, especially at this time of year.  There is something special about working with plants in the spring sunshine, a continuation from the past.  From time immemorial, planting in the spring has been a hopeful activity, a celebration of the end of winter looking forward to the harvest to come.

        Emily Lamb, Lady Cowper, was famous for her wit, charm and tact, and exercised great social power, not only as one of the Lady Patronesses of Almack’s, but in her later life as Lady Palmerston, wife of the Prime Minister.  It is important to look at her family life to see how she evolved to her subsequent status.

     Emily was born April 21, 1787 to Elizabeth, Lady Melbourne (born Milbanke) who was the wife of Peniston Lamb, Viscount Melbourne.  Lady Melbourne was a woman who was part of the “Devonshire House set”, a famous hostess,  and a highly powerful society figure.  Lady Melbourne was noted for her ambition, her discretion, and her influence.  Although the first child born of the marriage, a son, was undoubtedly that of her husband, Lady Melbourne had many affairs, including one with George, then the Prince of Wales, and the paternity of her other children (including Emily) was not clear.   The Earl of Egremont was a possible candidate as Emily’s natural father.  Although her affairs were not secrets, she conducted them with great tact, dignity and discretion; there is no indication of any scandal, and no record of any objection by Lord Melbourne.   Elizabeth was also a loyal friend (if not a loyal wife).   Emily was raised in a highly social and political circle and would have had the opportunity to learn her social skills from hostesses at the highest level of society, including her mother and Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire.  Her formal education was acquired from governesses.  Emily was the fifth of six children, including her brother William (who married Caroline Lamb, and became a Prime Minister). 

    In 1805, at age 18, Emily was married to Peter Leopold Louis Francis Nassau Cowper, 5th Earl Cowper.  Nine years older than Emily, Earl Cowper was the largest landowner in Hertfordshire, and invested as a Fellow in the Royal Society.  He was also considered lacking in ambition, dull and slow of speech.   Earl Cowper was also apparently uninterested in politics.   He worked with Henry Repton on the building of a house on one of his estates during this period, and they had a son, George, in 1806.  Emily threw herself into her social career, becoming a leading figure and one of the patronesses of Almack’s and, subsequently, a regular member of the court of George IV.  She had a reputation for being the most popular of the lady patronesses, and was noted for her tact, apparently skilled at smoothing over the social conflicts and quarrels that sprang up in her social milieu.   Four other children were born during the marriage, whose paternities are not clear.  Like her mother, there was no scandal; apparently, her husband also raised no objection. 

     At Almack’s, Emily was seen more and more frequently in company with Henry John Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston (who was noted for his own romantic adventures).  Lord Palmerston appeared regularly at Lady Cowper’s social functions.   The nature of their relationship during this time was and is subject to a great deal of speculation; at the very least, they were good friends.  (At most, they were intimate  – Emily’s son William born in 1811 was considered very like Lord Palmerston, and ultimately bore the last name Cowper-Temple.)  Her social career, however (as previously mentioned), was not blighted by open scandal, so we can assume that Emily learned not only deportment but discreet behavior from her mother.

     Upon the death in 1818 of her mother, Lady Melbourne, Emily became increasingly involved in assisting her brothers with their affairs, communicating regularly with her brother Frederick (a diplomat) and attempting to guide her brother William through his marriage and career crises.  William had fallen in love with and become engaged to Caroline Ponsonby (daughter of Henrietta who was the Duchess of Devonshire’s sister, and another member of the “Devonshire House Set”), and married her June 3, 1805.  As a result, Caroline became the Caroline Lamb, subsequently famous for her affair with Byron, wild behavior, and uncontrolled emotions.  The young couple lived with Lord and Lady Melbourne, which was a far from satisfactory arrangement for all.  Emily had little use or sympathy for Caroline, all of her sympathies being with William.  In 1816, Caroline published a novel GLENARVON anonymously.  In this novel, Caroline portrayed herself as an abused heroine, and other members of society (including her husband and mother-in-law, and Byron) in extremely bad light.  This tested William’s loyalty to the maximum, and almost resulted in a separation.  After Lady Melbourne’s death, Emily tried to protect William from Caroline’s emotional upheaval.  Caroline ultimately died January 26, 1828.  Emily was convinced that William was relieved (although he never remarried). 

     Between her social duties, and family responsibilities, Emily was very busy during this period.  When the Prince of Wales became King George IV in January of 1820, Emily was still active as lady patroness of Almack’s and a popular member of society.  She became a prominent figure at court and, by the late 1820’s, she was also a prominent political hostess for the Whigs, the party espoused by her friend Lord Palmerston and her brother William.    As William’s political career began to advance (he was Home Secretary in 1830, and Prime Minister in 1834), Emily acted as his hostess.

 Earl Cowper, who seemed to be most notable for his absence in Emily’s life, died June 27, 1837.  At this point, Queen Victoria had reigned 2 days.  Per force, Emily spent a quiet year for the obligatory period of mourning.  Lord Palmerston finally asked Emily to marry him.  Apparently, the ages of the couple were a cause for concern (both being in their 50’s!), so the blessing of the queen was requested and given.  They were married December 16, 1839.   Emily became the leading political hostess in London society, and used her influence to support Lord Palmerston and his policies.  Her social skills, charm and tact created a great deal of good will for him, and she was apparently very talented at gathering information.   By all accounts, they lived happily together until his death in October 18, 1865.   Emily passed away September 11, 1869, and was buried in Westminster Abbey, next to Lord Palmerston.

SOURCES:

Blythe, Henry.  CARO The Fatal Passion.  1972: Coward, McCann  Geoghegan, Inc.  New York.

Murray, Venetia.  AN ELEGANT MADNESS High Society in Regency England.  1998: Penguin, New York.

Bloy, Dr. Marjory.  Website: A Web of English History.  “Emily Lamb, Lady Cowper.”   http://www.historyhome.uk/people/cowper.htm  Viewed 2/28/2012.

The Jane Austen Centre Blog. “The Patronesses of Almack’s: The Arbiters of London Respectability” posted by Laura Boyle 7/17/2011.  http://www.janeausten.co.uk/the-patronesses-of-almacks-the-arbiters-of-london-respectibility/  Viewed 2/29/2012.

ThePeerage.com Person Page 2721.  “Emily Mary Lamb.” Last edited Nov. 26, 2009.  http://thepeerage.com/p2721.htm  Viewed 2/29/2012.

ThePeerage.com Person Page 1379.  “Peter Leopold Louis Francis Nassau Cowper, 5th Earl Cowper.” Last edited Feb. 20, 2011.  http://thepeerage.com/p1379.htm

GeorgianIndex.  Lady Melbourne.  http://www.georgianindex.net/mistresses/prinny_mistresses.html Viewed 2/20/2012.

“Tart of the Week: Elizabeth Lady Melbourne.” Posted July 11, 2008.  http:georgianaduchessofdevonshire.blogspot.com/2008/07/tart-of-the-week-elizabeth-lady-melbourne.html Viewed 2/20/2012

The Regency Collection website.  “An Elegant Madness – a host of mistakes.”  http://crash.ihug.co.nz/~awoodley/regency/madness.html

WOMEN AND POLITICS IN JANE AUSTEN’S TIME PART II

     In Jane’s surviving letters, there are tantalizing hints of political awareness. It must be remembered that the surviving letters are a fraction of those actually written-Cassandra destroyed many more. It is a mistake to assume, based on the surviving letters, that Jane did not more fully express herself on political subjects and matters. In my opinion, it is also a mistake to assume a completely one-sided view on her part.
Let’s take a look for some hints at political views in Jane Austen’s surviving letters ( JANE AUSTEN’S LETTERS, ed. Deirdre LeFaye):

Letter 29 (p. 69) Reference to a threatened act of Parliament as not an issue of concern: per Ms. LeFaye, this referred possibly to measures in regard to alleviating the distress of the winter of 1800-1801 (one such measure involved fixing the price of wheat, which was vigorously opposed.)
Letter 61 (p. 154) Reference to politics (electioneering, canvassing)-Jane reported that, although offered the opportunity to run unopposed, Mr. Thistlewaite declined to run due to previous electioneering costs.
Letter 72 (p. 186) Reference to Weald of Kent-Canal Bill-Jane congratulates Edward because she read that the bill was delayed. “There is always something to be hoped from Delay – .”
Letter 79 (p. 202) Jane asked Cassandra if she could find out if “Northamptonshire is a Country of Hedgerows….” – this is a reference to enclosure (common lands being acquired and enclosed, usually for sheep, which affected not only the livelihood of others no longer able to access this land for open field farming or shared grazing, but also affected tithing (land in lieu of yearly tithes). [Enclosure was bad if for superficial reasons, such as improving a view; good if it will increase profit or efficiency, per Celia Eston’s article in PERSUASIONS.]
Letter 96 (p. 252) Reference to Napoleonic War –Jane’s letter referred to speeches in parliament: 11/4/1814: Marquis Wellesley, in the words of Mr. Pitt, indicated that England saved herself and others; 11/8/1814: The House of Lords thanks to Marquis Wellesley for skill and ability in action subsequent to battle of Vittoria (this reflected the Tory desire to win the war); see also remarks about Lady B (Brooks or Bridges?).
Letter 106 (p. 273-274) Reference to the War of 1812 – Jane discussed Henry’s opinion that England would not defeat America, but that England was a nation improving in religion, which Americans don’t possess (Jane’s view). (This reflects Tory conservative religious views.)

     In my opinion, these letters indicate that Jane Austen was in fact politically aware, and had definite opinions on the political issues of the day. I believe that this reflects a strong probability that women in general shared these traits, even though women could not vote and were discouraged from participating in political debate or discussion at any level.
     A frequent criticism leveled at Jane Austen’s novels is her failure to mention current events or political issues. In JANE AUSTEN Women, Politics, and the Novel, Claudia Johnson said on page 10: “Considered from within the compelling rhetorical structures conservative novelists build, to suggest, as Austen among many others, frequently does, that fathers, sons, and brothers themselves may be selfish, bullying and unscrupulous, and that the ‘bonds of domestic attachment’ are not always sweet, is to attack the institutions which make morality possible and so to contribute to the dissolution of the government.” She also says, “If, as we have seen, women novelists [Jane Austen included here] were able to appropriate a reactionary type in order to advance modest but distinctly reformist positions about female manners, they developed other narrative strategies to examine Burkean premises about marriage and patriarchy while eluding the accusation that they favored a radical reconstitution of society.” To summarize, these novelists made their commentary subtle, to avoid being accused of attacking societal norms or of being desirous of radical change, thus making their works acceptable while still getting their opinions out there.
     There are many political clues in Jane Austen’s novels. Looking specifically at PRIDE AND PREJUDICE, and PERSUASION, I will address a few of them.
     PRIDE AND PREJUDICE was supposedly the most free spirited of Jane Austen’s novels, but was actually the most conservative, i.e. truer to older values and social structure (Johnson). Mr. Darcy is identifiably a Whig, as a wealthy landowner of high standing, who spent significant time in London, etc. (away from Pemberly), rich, definitely “high society” (he had danced at the Court of St. James, though seldom). Early in the novel, Darcy is seen as the handsome, wealthy, powerful hero (true to Cinderella story) but he had flaws and had to change to become worthy of winning Elizabeth. (Jane Austen showed a certain reluctant reverence for society, wealth and position, with Tory-esque values for individual merit and reward also). George Wickham was a classic Whig villain: although he was the son of Darcy’s father’s steward, he was treated as a son of the house, sent to Cambridge, and had expectations, which he squandered. Wickham expected advantages to be handed to him. After frittering away his advantages, he became a predator.
     Mr. Bingley, on the other hand, is recognizably a Tory, whose father made a fortune in trade; his success allowed his children to move up in society and become landowners. Mr. Bingley’s sisters especially aspired to Society roles (Whig “wanna-be’s”), as shown by Caroline’s relentless determination to catch Darcy. Other sympathetic Tory figures were the Gardiners: Mr. Gardiner was successful in the City, yet the couple’s manners and deportment made them acceptable in society.
     The Bennets themselves reflect the political divide. Mr. Bennet was a landowner and gentleman (inherited entailed property) who had no occupation. He married beneath him socially (she had a pretty face, was not educated, and brought little to the marriage). He was occupied with his own interests and place. Mr. Bennet, Elizabeth and Jane had the intelligence and ability to be able to fit into higher strata of society, while Mrs. Bennet and the younger girls did not. Elizabeth, as a gentleman’s daughter of charm, wit and intelligence, was found worthy of Mr. Darcy, despite the disparity of fortune and status. (This is a suggestion that Jane Austen may have felt that reform of social order was needed to allow for individual merit, but the hierarchical structure still basically sound. (CAMBRIDGE COMPANION P. 156.)
     In PERSUASION, Jane Austen’s last novel, her opinions had clearly matured. Sir Walter Elliot, Elizabeth Elliot, Lady Russell, the Dalrymples, Mary Musgrove are all classic Whig characters, convinced that  title, inherited wealth and property conferred status, regardless of personal merit. They did not perceive or readily value individual efforts to improve one’s circumstances. Of these, Lady Russell was the only one who really made an effort to value Capt. Wentworth as a man of merit because of her fondness for Anne. Anne Elliot was born a Whig, yet embraced the concept of earned value. Mr. Elliot was a Whig villain in the story: he was the heir to the title, the property entailed to him. Mr. Elliot lived in London “Society”, and married beneath him for gain. When his fortunes declined, he decided to reacquaint himself with Sir Walter and the family. His pursuit of Anne was predatory, to gain influence over Sir Walter, and to ingratiate himself. There are some striking similarities between Mr. Elliot and Wickham.
     Captain Wentworth, Admiral and Mrs. Croft, Captains Benwick and Harville represent a Tory ideal: they rose through their own merits; their personal worth made them acceptable and valuable. They embodied intelligence, hard work, and solid values and merit. Capt Wentworth being the hero and victorious suitor, combined Anne’s regard for his family and friends, show Austen’s solid Tory leanings and her ideas of the best company.
     Clearly, women’s interest in politics depended hugely on what issues had direct impact on them personally, and on the amount of information about the issues to which they had access. Literate women with access to print matter, including newspapers and gazettes, broadsheets, pamphlets, etc. would, for the most part, have been in households with the ability to provide the materials, and with the opportunity and time to read them. I submit that any woman who had family members participating in the war, or who had the opportunity or the ability to observe the effects of inequities in law (as in inheritance laws, debtor laws, civil penalties, etc.) would have some interest in political matters. Jane Austen, in particular, was encouraged to read widely and had multiple family issues, ranging from inheritance to war, which make it highly unlikely that she took no interest in politics. Although clearly having Tory sympathies, there are indications that she is not totally biased. There are hints of certain older establishment sympathies as well. I think it highly possible that Jane was actually of a moderate persuasion, perceiving the positive and negative of both the Whig and Tory positions. The glancing references in her letters and the subtle clues in her books assure us of her knowledge of these matters but only hint as to her opinions.
Bibliography:
Washington & Lee University, “The World of Jane Austen” 2009 Alumni College – Dr. Taylor Sanders- Lectures: ‘The British Empire at Full Attention (or Why were all those men in uniform?)’ on 7/21/09, and ‘The Court Jester: Was George III Truly Mad?: The Political Scene’ on 7/23/09; Dr. Marc Conner-Lecture ‘The Economies of Jane Austen: Wealth/Religion/Marriage’ on 7/24/09. (Outlines and my notes)
Austen, Jane. PRIDE AND PREJUDICE. London: 1813.
PERSUASION. London: 1817.
Copeland, Edward and McMaster, Juliet, ed. THE CAMBRIDGE COMPANION TO JANE AUSTEN. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. “Religion and Politics” by Gary Kelly, PP. 149-169.
Erickson, Carolly. ROYAL PANOPLY Brief Lives of the English Monarchs. “Epilogue: Historical Turning Points, ‘England in 1714’”, pp. 350-352. New York: History Book Club, 2003.
Johnson, Claudia L. JANE AUSTEN Women, Politics, and the Novel. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988.
LeFaye, Deirdre, ed. JANE AUSTEN’S LETTERS. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
Mitchell, Leslie. THE WHIG WORLD. London and New York: Hambledon Continuum, 2005.
PERSUASIONS, No. 24, 2002. “Jane Austen and the Enclosure Movement: The Sense and Sensibility of Land Reform,” by Celia Easton. PP. 71-89.
Pool, Daniel. WHAT JANE AUSTEN ATE AND CHARLES DICKENS KNEW From Fox Hunting to Whist-the Facts of Daily Life in 19th Century England. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1993.
ELECTIONEERING (from Robert Southey’s “Letters from England,” written in 1802 [originally published in 1807])
On-Line Research Sources:
Bloy, Dr. Marjory. A WEB OF ENGLISH HISTORY – THE AGE OF GEORGE III. http://www.historyhome.co.uk
FIND A GRAVE http://www.findagrave.com
THE EFFECTS OF THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION ON POLITICS , http://www.factmonster.com/ce6/history/A0858818.html
GEORGIAN BRITAIN: British History Under George I/II/III/IV and William IV http://www.ukstudentlife.com/Britain/History/Georgian.htm
A WEB OF ENGLISH HISTORY: THE AGE OF GEORGE III http://www.historyhome.co.uk/c-eight/ministry/ldgrenmi.htm
THE GEORGIAN INDEX http://www.georgianindex.net/Election/election.html
REGENCY COLLECTION. “Whig or Tory?” http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~awoodley/regency/whig.html

Women and Politics In Jane Austen’s Time

     As we are heating up for presidential elections, politics of course is becoming all-consuming.  What were politics like in Jane Austen’s time, and what were women’s concerns?  This is a big subject, and I would like to present some thoughts in a two-part article.  The first will present some thoughts and information about the political situation of the time; the second will address some ideas about politics and Jane Austen’s novels.

PART I

     Politics in Jane Austen’s time have little in common with politics today.  Before 1832, only 5 to 6% of the male population could vote, made up largely of aristocrats who were large property owners.  Parties (and party loyalty) were much more fluid.  Rhetoric was much more uncontrolled.  After the French Revolution, a more cautious spirit pervaded the English political landscape, reigning in ideas of change and individual rights.  Although women had been actively involved with politics in the previous generation (witness the Duchess of Devonshire and her sister soliciting votes for the Whigs, and the political hostess Mrs. Crewe; and women at the lower ends of the social scale participating in mobs and rallies), by the time Jane was a young woman, women were discouraged from concerning themselves directly with political activity.  Does that mean that women, and in particular Jane Austen, were uninformed or uninterested in politics?  For that matter, what were the issues in politics during Jane’s time that might have interested women? 

     A general political overview is helpful.  In Glorious Revolution of 1688, the Whigs succeeded in removing James II (and the exclusion of James VII/II from the throne) and establishing a constitutional monarchy  (William and Mary, followed by Queen Anne; after Anne’s death, Elector of Hanover was invited to rule.)  The Whig party felt that they had saved the realm and expected to be rewarded.  They embraced ideals of the American and French revolutions, but wanted to retain the existing structure.  Whig power declined due to their support of the French Revolution (popular until the Terror and the executions of the King and Queen).   The Tory government was much more conservative, wanted to win the Napoleonic Wars, and concerned with  fiscal responsibility.

     Political parties were not like today.  Membership was fluid: members of all sides switched with various issues.  There was cooperation as well as conflict (see Ministry of All The Talents-both Whigs and Tories –formed by Lord William Grenville, in place 2/1806-3/1807).  Party affiliations were often drawn along the lines of one issue, which resulted in strange partnerships and fluid alliances.  Forming of factions was characteristic of the period.  There were three basic groups active during this time, with movement back and forth at will.

     The Whig party supported a landowner-controlled monarchy (constitutional), and was somewhat reform minded (i.e. favored education as expected gratitude and support, supported some expansion of suffrage but didn’t expect or desire basic social structure/class changes), and sought electoral, parliamentary and philanthropic reforms within their constitutional position.  They resented the king’s control of patronage.  The Whig families controlled polite Society  (The “Upper 400”, the London season).  During Jane Austen’s era, they were the minority party, but still wielded great power on the social level.   They supported Prince of Wales.  George III hated the Whigs.

     The Tory party supported strong monarchy, and the Church of England.  More conservative, the Tories considered moves toward political reform dangerous.   Hard work, and personal worth allowed individual advancement.   The Tories took a more pragmatic, fiscal-minded view, and believed that the king should determine the direction of the state.   Country gentry, tradesmen and official administrative groups were most often allied to Tory goals.

     A third group, the Radicals, were much more independent.   They wanted broad reforms (expanded suffrage, broader religious freedom, etc.)

     Parliament was made up of two houses: the House of Lords consisting of peers of the realm (dukes, marquesses, earls, viscounts and barons), with the bishops and archbishops of the Church of England (Pool, p. 35), and the House of Commons (from the Norman French “Communes” or localities-elected from boroughs (towns) in the shires by electors whose right to vote was determined by sheriffs and the rules varied widely.)  For elections, seats were not linked to population, so representation was uneven, and a disproportionate number of seats were controlled by a few powerful men.  As a result of the Septennial Act of 1716, parliamentary elections were required every 7 years, with by-elections held between the general elections to replace a sitting member who died or resigned.  A very small number  were eligible to vote, and votes were bought and sold (both parties involved with this, even though illegal).  Public opinion had little effect on outcomes.  “Pocket boroughs” were small localities owned by one man who controlled the few resident voters, and were even bought and sold (see Duke of Bedford, Duke of Devonshire).    Both parties (Whigs and Tories) were entrenched in political system of patronage and nepotism.

      Jane Austen is often considered a Tory sympathizer, but did not disclose her personal opinions at length, as far as we know.  (Her brother Henry in 1818 was at pains to state that she was “thoroughly religious and devout” and “her opinions accorded strictly with those of our Established Church.” (CAMBRIDGE COMPANION p. 154)  This implies strong Tory leanings.)   Her mother Cassandra Leigh was connected to James Brydges, the 1st Duke of Chandos and Lord Leigh of Stoneleigh Abbey, but her immediate family had no money or influence (her father was a clergyman).   Jane’s father’s family was professional (George Austen’s father was a surgeon, his uncle a lawyer).  (George Austen was born in Tonbridge in Kent, one of four children of William Austen, a surgeon, and Rebecca (nee Hampson).) Both parents died before George was nine, and he was raised by his uncle, Francis Austen, a wealthy lawyer, who paid for George’s education at Tonbridge School and St. John’s College, Oxford.  In 1755, he was ordained in Rochester Cathedral.

                Various factors in Jane Austen’s life would have awakened an interest in many issues.  Her father, George Austen, a landless clergyman, had no money or property, leading to inheritance problems for his daughters.   Her cousin Eliza was the daughter of an East India merchant and her father’s sister who was sent out to India to find a husband (again, no money); Eliza’s mother took her to France where she married a minor French aristocrat connection.  During the French Revolution, Eliza’s husband was guillotined, a victim of the Terror.  (Eliza subsequently married Jane’s brother Henry.)  Jane’s  brother, Edward Austen-Knight, was a landowner with money, but had to be adopted to achieve his rank and fortune.    She had two brothers in the Navy, participating in war; for both the rank of admiral was achieved-they rose by merit and hard work.

     There were specific political issues that would be of particular interest to women, including Jane Austen.  First would be war; with husbands, fathers, sons, etc. going to war, there was a loss of protection and income for many (pay was slow to come, if issued at all; prize money could not be counted on).  Secondly were moral issues, such as the questions of slavery, and civil and criminal laws and penalties.  Although the slave trade was abolished in 1807, ownership was still legal.  Aunt Perrot’s trial for theft of a card of lace would have been an immediate concern, especially as possible penalties included being transported to a penal colony.  Thirdly, and for many most importantly, were marital issues; although much was written about love, marriage had more to do with property.  Frequently, family pressure was applied to compel young people to marry appropriately.  Once married, women had little or no control of their assets (in essence, they and anything they owned became the property of their husbands).  Divorce was hugely expensive and time-consuming, involving a  petition to Parliament; women had great difficulty gaining custody of children, or funds. 

     Another issue of huge importance was inheritance law-the issues primogeniture (property and money going to the oldest son), entail (restrictions on the disposal of property), etc. limited women’s ability to inherit.  With few opportunities available to support themselves, women were frequently left at the mercy of the intentions and generosity of male family members to provide support.

     General reform was a major topic of the day on many levels.  Regarding slavery issues, William Wilberforce (and his Anti-Slavery league) was active during her life.  Although the slave trade in the British Empire was abolished in 1807, there was still on-going activity to abolish ownership of slaves.  In education, Hannah Moore (a prolific writer, founder of schools) and Mary Wollstonecraft (who wrote about women’s education) brought issues of education to the forefront,  as availability of education to all was not considered a right, or even desirable.  Election reforms, including suffrage and other rights for Catholics and non-landowners were also major issues.   In the political climate of the time, given the loss of the American colonies and the French Revolution leading to the destruction of French society and the rise of Napoleon, these were sensitive issues, not to be embraced lightly. 

    The fear of revolution in Britain was real, and issues of reform exacerbated these fears.  Indeed, laws were passed to restrict the press from publishing material that could be construed as critical or seditious.

Bibliography:

Washington & Lee University, “The World of Jane Austen” 2009 Alumni College – Dr. Taylor Sanders-  Lectures: ‘The British Empire at Full Attention (or Why were all those men in uniform?)’ on 7/21/09, and  ‘The Court Jester: Was George III Truly Mad?: The Political Scene’ on 7/23/09; Dr. Marc Conner-Lecture ‘The Economies of Jane Austen: Wealth/Religion/Marriage’ on 7/24/09.  (Outlines and my notes)

Austen, Jane.  PRIDE AND PREJUDICE.  London: 1813.

                          PERSUASION.  London: 1817.                       

Copeland, Edward and McMaster, Juliet, ed.  THE CAMBRIDGE COMPANION TO JANE AUSTEN. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.  “Religion and Politics” by Gary Kelly, PP. 149-169.

Erickson, Carolly.  ROYAL PANOPLY Brief Lives of the English Monarchs.  “Epilogue: Historical Turning Points, ‘England in 1714’”, pp. 350-352.  New York: History Book Club, 2003.

Johnson, Claudia L.  JANE AUSTEN Women, Politics, and the Novel.  Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988. 

LeFaye, Deirdre, ed.  JANE AUSTEN’S LETTERS. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.

Mitchell, Leslie.  THE WHIG WORLD. London and New York: Hambledon Continuum, 2005.

PERSUASIONS, No. 24, 2002.  “Jane Austen and the Enclosure Movement: The Sense and Sensibility of Land Reform,” by Celia Easton.  PP. 71-89.

Pool, Daniel.  WHAT JANE AUSTEN ATE AND CHARLES DICKENS KNEW From Fox Hunting to Whist-the Facts of Daily Life in 19th Century England.  New York: Simon and Schuster, 1993.

ELECTIONEERING (from Robert Southey’s “Letters from England,” written in 1802 [originally published in 1807])

On-Line Research Sources:

Bloy, Dr. Marjory.  A WEB OF ENGLISH HISTORY – THE AGE OF GEORGE III.  http://www.historyhome.co.uk

FIND A GRAVE http://www.findagrave.com

 THE EFFECTS OF THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION ON POLITICS , http://www.factmonster.com/ce6/history/A0858818.html    

GEORGIAN BRITAIN: British History Under George I/II/III/IV and William IV http://www.ukstudentlife.com/Britain/History/Georgian.htm 

A WEB OF ENGLISH HISTORY: THE AGE OF GEORGE III                                                 http://www.historyhome.co.uk/c-eight/ministry/ldgrenmi.htm

THE GEORGIAN INDEX http://www.georgianindex.net/Election/election.html 

REGENCY COLLECTION.  “Whig or Tory?”  http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~awoodley/regency/whig.html

And The Winner Is….

The giveaway of HEYERWOOD: A Novel on Maria Grazia’s blog, My Jane Austen Book Club, has closed. The Winner is Linda Brower! A signed hardcover will be on it’s way to Linda shortly. Congratulations, Linda!

A big thank-you again to Maria Grazia for allowing me to be a guest on her wonderful blog! (A link to her blog is here for those of you of have not yet visited there.)

Mad about Mary…

As a follow up to my post about Jane Austen and A VINDICATION OF THE RIGHTS OF WOMAN, I would like to direct your attention to a multi-part series about Mary Wollstonecraft and Jane Austen  on Roberta Wedge’s blog,  A Vindication of the Rights of Mary.  This is a wonderful blog, dedicated to information about Mary Wollstonecraft, her work, her era and her sphere of influence.  Please take a look!

Part 1: http://avindicationoftherightsofmary.blogspot.com/2012/01/jane-austen-lost-daughter-part-one.html

Part 2: http://avindicationoftherightsofmary.blogspot.com/

Part 3 still to come…