Princess Louise’s Early Years of Marriage

Last month, we looked at Princess Louise’s choosing to become the future Duchess of Argyll. View that post HERE. Today, we will take at look at the marriage itself. 

800px-Queen_Victoria_(1819-1901),_after_Franz_Xavier_Winterhalter_-_Portrait_of_Princess_Louise_(1848-1939)

Portrait of Princess Louise (1848-1939), inscribed and dated ‘Victoria/after Winterhalter/1851’ (lower right) and with inscription ‘H.R.H. P’cess Louise, copied by Queen Victoria. (on 1st attempt in Oils) from F. Winterhalter. 1852’ (on the reverse). ~ Public Domain ~ Wikipedia ~ 31 December 1850

Just because Princess Louise had finally emerged from the shadow cast by her familial relationship to Queen Victoria did not mean Louise had completely shed the mantle she had worn for many years. In fact two days into her marriage to John Douglas Sutherland Campbell, Marquis of Lorne and heir to the dukedom of Argyll, the Queen herself paid them a visit. The newlyweds chose to spend the first part of their marriage journey at Claremont House, near Windsor. Queen Victoria’s purpose was more than motherly concerns for her daughter, for Lorne had thought to take Louise to the Continent as part of their honeymoon. One must remember, though, that Europe had recently seen the end of the Franco-Prussian War. Therefore, it was likely that Louise would not be acknowledged properly in the European courts as the daughter of the Queen of England. Miraculously, Lorne rejected his mother-in-law’s meddling, much to Victoria’s dismay. 

In Florence, for example, Louise and Lorne used one of the marquis’s secondary titles, that of Lord Sundridge, and the pair was able to avoid many of the obligatory calls on foreign royalty required of a British princess. 

When the couple returned to London, they originally stayed at Argyll Lodge, a mansion north of Kensington High Street. The estate bordered Holland Park. The estate was connected to Westminster by a turnpike road. The time at Argyll Lodge provided Louise time to become more intimate with the Campbell family: Argylls, Sutherlands, Westminsters, Leinsters, Northumberlands, Blantyres, and Carlisles. The Duke and Duchess of Argyll oversaw what went on at Argyll Lodge, but Louise noted later in life that she had been happy there. Eventually, when Lorne became the Duke of Argyll, they would reside at Inveraray Castle in Scotland, a massive castle that would prove to be a “money hole” for the Argyll family. 

Princess_Louise_and_Lorne_engagement

The engagement photo of Princess Louise (Marchioness of Lorne and Duchess of Argyll) and John, Marquess of Lorne and 9th Duke of Argyll ~ Public Domain ~ via Wikipedia

When Lorne first escorted Louise to Inveraray, the couple was greeted with a crowd of Campbells from the surrounding villages and towns and farmlands to welcome the Queen’s daughter. Pipers reportedly played “The Campbells Are Comin’.”

In London, the couple had to find a suitable home of their own. They leased a five-storery townhouse in Belgravia’s Grovenor Crescent, a relatively new enclave for the wealthy. The house was quite expensive, and Lorne only acceded to taking it, for he recognized his wife’s position in society. 

Needless to say, Victoria did not leave her daughter to Louise’s duties. She often begged for Louise’s assistance, keeping Lorne and Louise apart for long periods of time. Even so, Louise was the only one of her sisters who was able to enjoy a certain level of normalcy. Despite Victoria’s efforts to convince Lorne to accept a dukedom, Lorne consistently refused, saying he preferred to remain in the House of Commons and that he would not dishonor his father or the Argyll dukedom by accepting the Queen’s offer. Victoria wrote to Louise: “… if I approved of Lorne marrying MY daughter, he ought to have rank as her husband.”

The largest issue with which the couple dealt was the lack of children. Later, people questioned whether Lorne was a homosexual, but Louise’s writings regularly mentions their sexual encounters. By Victorian standards, Louise’s inability to conceive was a “stigma” on her character. Louise traveled to Germany to partake of medicinal baths and the Queen instructed the senior royal physician, Sir William Jenner, to offer advice to the princess. For more than a dozen years, Louise attempted several homeopathic “cures.” In retrospect, most experts believe her bout of meningitis was the cause of her remaining childless. 

According to Jerrold M. Packard, author of Victoria’s Daughters (©1998, St. Martin’s, New York, 182), “Vicky [the Queen’s eldest daughter] also fretted about Louise’s lack of children, wondering in a letter to Louise when ‘a host of small Campbells’ might be available to keep their various cousins company. When later complimenting her daughter on a new country house she had taken, Vicky commented not very tactfully how much nicer it would be there were a ‘few little fair heads looking out the windows.’ Their mother told Louise to ‘be careful of your diet and in not omitting aperient medicines….’ The queen also weighed in with the view that no children were preferable to ‘wicked’ ones. Leopold [Duke of Albany, Victoria’s son and Louise’s brother] tactlessly wrote his congratulations to Louise when her sister-in-law (the wife of Lord Archie Campbell, Lorne’s younger brother) had a son, with the inane observation that the birth was of a ‘possible future (I hope not) Duke….'”

 

 

Posted in British history, Church of England, customs and tradiitons, family, history, marriage, royalty, Scotland, titles of aristocracy, Victorian era | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

A Closer Look at “Mr. Darcy’s Fault: A Pride and Prejudice Vagary”

 

Mr. Darcy’s Fault was my first foray into what is known as JAFF (Jane Austen Fan Fiction). Since 2009, I have been known as a Jane Austen-inspired writer. Of my 30 published books, I have written 17 Austen-related titles (with #18 to make an appearance in August 2017). Eight of those books are considered retellings and sequels, with all but one based on Pride and Prejudice. Nine are vagaries. Mr. Darcy’s Fault is a vagary, which is also known as a variation in writing circles. By definition, a vagary means 1. an unpredictable or erratic action, occurrence, course, or instance: i. e., the vagaries of weather; the vagaries of the economic scene. 2. a whimsical, wild, or unusual idea, desire, or action. Vagary came into use between 1565-75, in sense a “wandering journey”; apparently Latin vagārī , meaning to wander.

In fan fiction circles, to write a vagary/variation, the author makes a change in the original story that creates a whole new story line. The challenge is to bring the characters back to a similar conclusion as the original at the book’s end. Fan fiction novels are so popular that one can also find vagaries, retellings, and sequels for authors such as Charlotte Bronte, Charles Dickens, Elizabeth Gaskell, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, etc. Some of you might scoff at this idea, but permit me to provide one major statistic: in March 2017, there were 85 books released related to Jane Austen, and all were snatched up by Jane Austen readers. Needless to say, some were more successful that others, but all were received by an insatiable block of readers, who ignore all the predictions of publishers who say the market is overloaded with Austen stories. They simply keep purchasing books. 

For those authors who, like me, who also write Regencies romances and romantic suspense, Austen readers often follow me over to the Regency market. Is the transfer complete. Absolutely not. But there is a steady crossover from both my Austen market and my Regency market.

So, what is the set up for Mr. Darcy’s Fault? It begins with Darcy waiting in the grove at Rosings Park to give Elizabeth Bennet his letter – the one he wrote after his disastrous first proposal – the one in which he makes his explanations regarding separating Jane Bennet from Mr. Bingley and the one in which he relates the truth of his dealings with Mr. Wickham. As in Pride and Prejudice, Elizabeth reluctantly accepts the letter and when she leaves Mr. Darcy behind, she reads it. The change comes when Darcy spots Wickham in the vicinity of Rosings Woods. He makes the assumption that Elizabeth and Wickham planned an assignation. He thinks to leave her to her misery, but the dogs set up a howl. He follows the sound to find Elizabeth unconscious in the woods. In his hurry to see her to safety, he does not think of the letter she carried. When he does think of it, he can find no traces of it. As he treated her leg injury and carried her back to Rosings, Darcy has “ruined” Elizabeth’s reputation. She has no choice but to agree to marry him, but as far as she is concerned Jane’s misery, Mr. Wickham’s penury, and her accident are all Mr. Darcy’s fault. 

MDF Cover copy.jpgMr. Darcy’s Fault: A Pride and Prejudice Vagary

What if an accident prevents Elizabeth Bennet from reading Mr. Darcy’s letter of apology? What if said letter goes missing and ends up in the hands of George Wickham? What if Mr. Wickham plans to use the evidence of both Georgiana Darcy’s ruination and Darcy’s disdain for the Bennets to his benefit? How will Darcy counter Wickham’s plans and claim happiness with the woman he loves?

When he notices his long-time enemy in the vicinity of Hunsford Cottage, FITZWILLIAM DARCY means to put an end to an assignation between ELIZABETH BENNET and Mr. Wickham, but Darcy is not prepared for the scene which greets him in Rosings Woods. Elizabeth lies injured and crumpled beneath the trees, and in order to save her, by Society’s standards, Darcy must compromise Elizabeth. Needless to say, Darcy does not mind being forced into claiming Elizabeth to wife, but what of the lady’s affections? Can Darcy tolerate Elizabeth’s regard being engaged elsewhere?

Amazon      Kindle        Nook       CreateSpace       Kobo   

Chapter One 

“THERE IS NOTHING FOR IT,” he said with a heavy sigh. “I will gather Georgiana from London and set a course for Pemberley.”

Attempting to clarify his thoughts, Darcy stood under the trees of the well-groomed grove of Rosings Woods. He had spent a long night, a night in which his saw his dreams of marital happiness dissolve as quickly as the mist drifting in from the Swale. He spent the hours of darkness composing a letter of apology and of parting for Miss Elizabeth Bennet, and a few minutes prior in the new day’s early hours, he placed it in her hands with a plea for the lady to read it. 

 

Darcy sank down upon a wooden bench that his aunt placed along the carefully cleared path. Darcy doubted Lady Catherine ever walked in this part of the grove, but it was very much of his aunt’s nature to maintain carefully tended lawns and enchanting pathways leading to a nature walk.

 

“It is my fault,” he told a rabbit, which scurried into the opening. “I sorely misjudged the lady. I assumed my consequence would secure Miss Elizabeth’s approval.” Darcy shook his head in disbelief. “I certainly acted in a gormless fashion. I desired the woman because she did not easily succumb to the allure of my family’s position, and then I knew surprise when Miss Elizabeth acted as she always does. My fault…” he groaned before burying his head in his hands.

With his eyes closed, the scene of last evening’s horror replayed across his imagination.

“In vain have I struggled. It will not do. My feelings will not be repressed. You must allow me to tell you how ardently I admire and love you.”

Darcy expected Miss Elizabeth’s immediate agreement, but was met instead with her cold response.

“In such cases as this, it is, I believe, the established mode to express an obligation for the sentiments avowed, however unequally they may be returned. It is natural that obligation should be felt, and if I could feel gratitude, I would now thank you. But I cannot–I never desired your good opinion, and you certainly bestowed it most unwillingly. I am sorry to occasion pain to anyone. It was most unconsciously done, however, and, I hope will be of short duration. The feelings which you tell me long prevented the acknowledgment of your regard can have little difficulty in overcoming it after this explanation.”

A second groan escaped Darcy’s lips.

“Certainly I did not show well before the lady,” he whispered harshly. “I should have guarded my words. The colonel will have a sound laugh when he learns of my folly.”

His cousin’s words in describing Darcy’s lack of social skill to Miss Elizabeth still echoed in Darcy’s memory.

“It is because he will not give himself the trouble.”

“Yet, even so, how could Miss Bennet be so misguided as to think I would quickly recover from my professions of love? Did she not realize my declarations honest?”

Another would never fill the hole in his gut. Emptiness always followed Darcy about, but after taking the acquaintance of Elizabeth Bennet, he had thought she would make him whole. Now the yearning was stronger than ever, as if his Soul reached out, only to have its hands slapped away for being imprudent.

“How do I begin again with the image of Miss Elizabeth etched upon my heart?”

With acceptance of the impossible, Darcy stood slowly before sucking in a steadying breath.

“Lady Catherine and Ann are likely to be in the morning room. Her ladyship will not be happy to learn I mean a speedy exit from Rosings.”

Returning his hat to his head, Darcy squared his shoulders. Yet, the sound of hurried footsteps had him spinning in the direction of the gate where he had encountered Miss Elizabeth earlier to observe a familiar figure weaving his way in the direction of Hunsford Cottage.

“What the devil is he doing in Kent?” Darcy growled.

* * *

If Elizabeth, when Mr. Darcy gave her the letter, did not expect it to contain a renewal of his offers, she formed no expectations at all of its contents. No longer encumbered by his sudden appearance or his equally speedy exit, she could now stomp her foot in annoyance and complain under her breath, both of which brought little relief to her anxiousness.

“Dratted man! I should have thrown his letter at his too stiff back.”

Yet, instinctively, Elizabeth clasped the letter to her chest.

“It is not as if the man plans to offer you his hand a second time,” Elizabeth told the rising hopes she fought hard to quash. “Foolish girl,” she warned her racing heart. “A man of Mr. Darcy’s importance could not be made to beg for my acquiescence.”

After Mr. Darcy’s withdrawal last evening, the realization of what she had done made inroads into Elizabeth’s resolve.

“Even though the connection would benefit my dearest family, my esteemed father would never have permitted me to marry purely for the bond.” Elizabeth sought justification for what others would perceive as a moment of pure foolhardiness. “And God knows I could never tolerate the man’s control of my life. I am not cut of the same cloth as Jane: I cannot act the martyr.”

Thoughts of the pain Mr. Darcy brought to her sister’s door only riled Elizabeth further.

“I have no wish in denying that I did everything in my power,” Mr. Darcy had replied to Elizabeth’s accusation with assumed tranquility, “to separate my friend from your sister, or that I rejoice in my success. Toward him I was kinder than toward myself.”

Elizabeth looked in the direction Mr. Darcy had walked: The gentleman had turned once more into the plantation. “I should follow him, tear up this declaration of his superiority, and throw it into his face. How would you like that, Mr. Darcy?” Elizabeth taunted the spot where she last saw the gentleman.

Although she would never admit it aloud, recovering from Mr. Darcy’s proposal had not yet been achieved: Since his hurried departure from Hunsford Cottage last evening, Elizabeth had thought of little else. Such was the reason she had begged off assisting Charlotte in the garden to indulge her need for air and exercise.

“After last evening’s headache, I fear I am totally indisposed for employment,” Elizabeth had told her friend.

When she left upon her walk, she purposely chose the lane, which led farther from the turnpike road rather than to face the possibility of encountering Mr. Darcy in the parkland. But Elizabeth’s efforts proved fruitless for Mr. Darcy appeared suddenly from a grove, which edged the park. She had thought to retreat, but he had seen her, and Elizabeth was not of the nature to cower; therefore, she stood her ground, moving again toward the gate, which led to the groomed grounds.

“Miss Elizabeth,” he called while she refused to acknowledge his approach with either a curtsy or verbal reply. Mr. Darcy held out the letter, which she took without thought. He said with what Elizabeth termed as haughty composure, “I was walking in the grove some time, in the hope of meeting you. Will you do me the honor of reading that letter?”

Elizabeth looked down at the letter held tight in her grasp.

“I suppose I should read the poisonous missive and be done with it,” she grumbled.

Reluctantly she returned to the path leading further into the woods. As she walked, Elizabeth broke the wax seal and opened the letter, two sheets of foolscap, written quite through, in a very close hand covered by an envelope, itself likewise full.

“Rosings. Eight of the clock,” she read aloud the first line. Her steps slowed, but Elizabeth continued along the prescribed path. “Be not alarmed, madam, on receiving this letter by the apprehension of its containing any repetition of the sentiments, or renewal of those offers, which were last night so disgusting to you.”

As I expected, she thought, there will be no renewal of Mr. Darcy’s proposal. Elizabeth did not know whether that particular fact disappointed her or brought gladness for the finality of the man’s regard.

“I write without any intention of paining you, or humbling myself, by dwelling on wishes which, for the happiness of both, cannot be too soon forgotten; and the effort which the formation and the perusal of this letter must occasion should have been spared, had not my character required it to be written and read.”

Elizabeth paused suddenly to huff her indignation.

“Naturally Mr. Darcy’s unbridled pride would demand the last word on the matter. Heaven forbid Mr. Darcy practiced the idea of going one’s own way and letting others do likewise. I wish he were before me so I might bring the gentleman more clarity upon the subject.”

With a growl of resignation, she returned to both her walk and the letter.

“You must therefore pardon,” she read through tight lips, “the freedom with which I demand your attention; your feelings, I know will bestow it unwillingly, but I demand it of your justice. Demand?” she hissed. “When did you not demand, Mr. Darcy? And do not flatter yourself to think you know my disposition!”

Despite the fact she unwillingly gave into her strong curiosity to read what would amount to nothing but untruths, Elizabeth was not about to give the gentleman an inch of rightness.

With anger’s bile rising to her throat, she raised her eyes to the heavens, saying a quick prayer for patience. Elizabeth stood perfectly still, seeking the goodness Jane would practice in this sham, but she could not seem to bring her emotions into check. In frustration, she sat a bruising pace, knowing she could not return to the Cottage and her friend without first burning away some of her animosity toward the man. If Mr. Collins learned of Mr. Darcy’s proposal, her cousin would likely drag Elizabeth by her hair to Rosings Park to apologize to Lady Catherine for having drawn the attention of Her Ladyship’s nephew.

“It is very unladylike of me to think so, but I would enjoy throttling the gentleman!” Elizabeth fumed as she marched along smartly while ignoring the beauty of God’s hand, which she would customarily cherish. “How is this madness ever to end? How may I face Mr. Darcy and his aunt when all I can think upon is the gentleman’s umbrage? It will be a difficult fortnight before I can escape to Longbourn.”

Elizabeth glanced at the pages she held tightly to her cloak.

“Should I continue with this deceit or place it in one of Mrs. Collins’s replaces?” she mocked.

She shook the offending letter harshly. Determined to have no more to do with Mr. Darcy, with trembling fingers, Elizabeth began to refold the pages. Yet, before she could complete the task, her eyes fell upon the lines from which she last read.

Her pace slowed once more, and unwittingly, Elizabeth read, “Two offenses of a very different nature, and by no means of equal magnitude, you last night laid to my charge. The first was that, regardless of the sentiments of either, I detached Mr. Bingley from your sister.”

The man possessed a way of forthright speaking, which always challenged Elizabeth’s best efforts of equanimity. Never having fully subsided, her anger roared again.

“Do you mean to deny your involvement, Mr. Darcy? You bragged of your success in the matter only last evening,” she huffed.

Ignoring where her steps led her, as well as the thickening of the vegetation surrounding her, Elizabeth bit out the words as she continued reading Mr. Darcy’s recitation aloud:

“My second offense, that I had, in defiance of various claims, in defiance of honor and humanity, ruined the immediate prosperity and blasted the prospects of Mr. Wickham. Willfully and wantonly to threw off the companion of my youth, the acknowledged favorite of my father, who had scarcely any other dependence than on our patronage, and who was brought up to expect its exertion, would be a depravity to which the separation of two young persons whose affection could be the growth of only a few weeks, could bear no comparison. But from the severity of that blame which was last night so liberally bestowed, respecting each circumstance, I shall hope to be in the future secured, when the following account of my actions and their motives are read. If, in the explanation of them, which is due to myself, I am under the necessity of relating feelings, which may be offensive to yours, I can only say that I am sorry. The necessity must be obeyed, and further apology would be…”

“Absurd!” Elizabeth screeched as she stumbled upon a tree root, pitching forward. Before she could right her stance, a loud click announced she wandered too far from the customary path through the woods. All she could do was scream as the trap meant for a fox snapped shut about her ankle. Her half boots did not prevent the sharp claws of the leg trap from piercing her skin.

~ ~ ~

Darcy quickened his pace, but even so, by the time he reached where the lane leading to the turnpike road marched along with the parkland’s paling, he lost sight of the figure. In frustration, he turned in a circle to survey the various paths leading to Hunsford Cottage, the woodlands, and the park.

“Which way did the scoundrel flee?” He ground out the words. “I thought the dastard in Meryton.” But then the obvious connections arrived. “Could Mr. Wickham’s presence in Kent be the reason for Miss Elizabeth’s refusal?”

Darcy’s mind became a red-hot haze.

“Has Miss Elizabeth renewed her interest in the gentleman?” he whispered in harsh tones. “Perhaps an elopement is afoot. Would than not be the pinnacle of irony?” A deep sigh of acceptance escaped Darcy’s lips. “If the lady’s heart is engaged elsewhere, you escaped a miserable marriage, Darcy.”

More determined than ever to be quickly fromRosings, Darcy crossed to the gate to return to his aunt’s manor house. He knew he should make the effort to ensure the unwelcome visitor left the area, but he could not engender the effort. He would instruct Lady Catherine’s head groom to send out men to drive Darcy’s long-time enemy from the estate’s land.

“And if Miss Elizabeth chooses to follow Mr. Wickham, then more the pity for the Bennets.”

The sound of a dog barking somewhere off to his right had Darcy’s ears straining to locate the noise. Lady Catherine’s games keeper used several Springer spaniels and bloodhounds to keep poachers at bay, as well as to rid the parkland of the creatures Her Ladyship deplored.

“Perhaps the hound cornered a different breed of poacher,” Darcy declared with a wry twist of his lips. “As much as I hold no desire to come upon a lover’s tryst, my pride demands I know the truth.”

~ ~ ~

Face first, Elizabeth smacked the ground hard. With nothing upon which she could catch a handhold, she struck the earth with a resounding thud, one that drove the air from her lungs and literally, shook every bone in her body.

“Lord in Heaven,” she groaned when a breath was finally possible, as she attempted to shove her body upward upon her elbows, only to collapse again from the pain shooting up her calf. She sputtered against the clump of grass and dead leaves at her lips. “What have you done, Elizabeth Bennet?” she chastised. The pain coursed through her leg, and tears formed in her eyes. Raising her head to claim her bearings, she made a second attempt to right her position, only to be held firmly in place.

 

“A trap,” she pronounced aloud, as the blackness fogged her thinking.

In her distracted state, Elizabeth stepped into a trapper’s lure, which was bad enough, but the leg trap also caught part of the bowl of her day dress, essentially locking her right side in place. She could not bend her knee, nor could she sit to remove the trap. Elizabeth laid upon her stomach in a wooded area of the estate, a place few would think to look for her; there was no means of escape unless she created one.

“It is not as if God means to send you a rescuer,” Elizabeth grumbled as she fought for a lucid thought.

Even though, she realized the futility of her efforts, Elizabeth dutifully emitted several loud calls for assistance. She waited after each for an answering response, but when none came, the fear returned to her heart. Moisture ran down her temples and formed upon her upper lip. With difficulty, Elizabeth worked her right arm free of her cloak to wipe at the droplets away, only to come away with blood smears upon her glove.

“What else, God?” she grumbled, realizing her nose and forehead seeped blood.

With a concentrated effort, Elizabeth raised her head to look over her shoulder to the trapped ankle; again, she attempted to move her injured foot only to be met with more excruciating pain.

“I cannot simply lie here,” she groaned in frustration.

However, as the blackness staked its claim upon her sensibility, Elizabeth succumbed to the need to rest her forehead upon her arm, thinking she simply required a few moments to construct an idea for escape. The calm of her surrounds lured her closer to unconsciousness, but the sound of something moving through the woods had her alert with apprehension.

When the two dogs came bounding into the path ahead of her, Elizabeth did not know whether to celebrate or know more fear. The animals stilled with a warning growl and a barring of teeth.

“Easy,” she whispered. Her heartbeat hitched higher. “Is your master about?” She turned her head slowly to look for the animals’ owner. The hound put his nose to the ground and began to sniff her cloak and arm. “I am not your enemy,” she said in soothing tones.

And then the dog did the unthinkable. He sat beside her and lifted his voice to the trees. The spaniel joined the hound in setting up an alarm, and if the sound were not so ear piercing, Elizabeth would applaud their efforts in her behalf. Instead, she covered the ear closest to the dog with her free hand.

“This is all Mr. Darcy’s fault,” she added her complaint to the mayhem, as the hound took up the call once more. “Him and his dratted letter.”

~ ~ ~

With a couple of miscues, Darcy followed the sound of dogs’ pleas. Yes, there were two: a hound, which split the air with his long, mournful howl, and the deep, resonant ‘woof’ of a working dog. Periodically, Darcy paused simply to listen to the animals ring an alarm. They evidently cornered either a two-legged intruder or a four- legged one. Darcy was betting on the former, but either way, he meant to learn the truth of the racket. However, he did not chase the sound without first removing the Queen Anne pistol he carried in his jacket and then checking the hidden blade in his walking cane.

Prepared for action, when Darcy rounded the curve in the narrow path, he did not expect the sight, which greeted him.

“Miss Elizabeth?” Darcy stumbled to a halt when the spaniel sat low in his haunches to growl a warning against Darcy’s approach.

“Easy,” Darcy said without the anxiousness rushing through his veins. He glanced to where Elizabeth Bennet lay unmoving upon the ground. Instinctively, he knelt to the dog’s level. “I mean the lady no harm.”

Darcy permitted the animal to sniff him before he stood again. Edging closer to Elizabeth, he cautiously examined the situation. Her crumpled form brought an ache to his heart. Seeing her such reminded Darcy of the petite fragility her frame claimed; often, Elizabeth’s personality made her appear larger than she was.

“Elizabeth?” Darcy knelt to whisper into her hair. “Speak to me.”

Although muffled by the earth into which she spoke, Elizabeth weakly chastised him.

“I never gave you permission, sir, to use my Christian name.”

Despite the dire situation, Darcy smiled. “That is my darling girl,” he taunted.

Raising her upper body upon her elbows, Elizabeth protested his familiarity.

“I am not your ‘darling girl,’ Mr. Darcy. Not your darling anything.”

Darcy thought, Not yet, but instead he asked, “Where are you injured?”

She turned her head stiffly to glance at him over her shoulder. “My right ankle. While reading your cursed letter, I stepped in a trapper’s lure.” Her lips were tight, and there was blood caked upon her forehead and chin.

 

“My God, Woman!” Darcy exclaimed as he flipped Elizabeth’s cloak from his way. “Why are you not caterwauling in pain?” Darcy’s fingers trembled as they lightly brushed the steel trap, while his admiration for the woman increased substantially.

“I promise I will fill several handkerchiefs with my tears once this is over,” she quipped.

Elizabeth gasped, biting hard on her lip to sti e the cry of pain, when Darcy attempted to loosen her skirt tail from the mechanism.

“I apologize, Miss Elizabeth,” he mumbled as he examined the situation from a different angle.

Elizabeth heaved a heavy sigh. “I would like to say I am your champion, but I fear my patience is dwindling. You will know success in this matter, will you not, Mr. Darcy?” she asked breathlessly.

Darcy’s mind filled with unbearable pressure to yank the offending lure from her sight, but he said, “Bear with me. I promise to free you.”

Elizabeth returned her head to her forearm. “I am at your disposal, Mr. Darcy,” she said wearily.

Darcy suspected her supposed calm came from a bit of delirium. He wished he fetched a groom or Lady Catherine’s grounds’ man before he set out upon this task, but his pride told him Elizabeth Bennet refused him because she preferred Mr. Wickham. Little did he think a letter of explanation could bring her more pain.

Darcy caught the rent in the hem of her gown and gave it a mighty yank to open the tear further. Unsurprisingly, Miss Elizabeth did not protest, a sign the lady succumbed to her peril. Gently, Darcy ran his hand along her back to check her breathing. Although weak, her breaths were as if she were sleeping.

Assured, his worse fears would know another day, Darcy reached behind him to find his discarded cane lying beside the pistol upon the ground, before giving Elizabeth’s shoulders a tender shake to arouse her. “I mean to pry the trap open,” he explained. “Do you possess the strength to lift your leg free of the contraption while I hold the lure open?”

Elizabeth raised her chin from the ground. “Tell me when, sir.” For a split second, Elizabeth’s body stiffened with alertness, and then she went completely limp.

From beside him, the spaniel whined. “I agree,” Darcy grumbled as he crawled on all fours to check her breathing once more.

Finding her unconscious, but breathing normally, he scrambled to his feet to straddle her booted ones. Stripping away his caped coat and tossing it to the ground, he edged Elizabeth’s left foot from his way; anxiously, he placed the toe of one of his Hessians on the right side of the trap, loosening the tension of the mechanism as it eased from her skin. Even so, Elizabeth did not move, a fact that worried Darcy greatly. Miss Elizabeth was likely the most strong-willed woman of his acquaintance. Her resting docilely was not a good omen, in his opinion.

Slowly and carefully, Darcy wedged the cane into the small opening. His heart told him to hurry, but his mind kept repeating the need for great care.

“Do not wreak more damage upon the woman,” Darcy said aloud. “If the trap is sprung again, it will likely do irreparable harm to Miss Elizabeth’s ankle.”

He swallowed hard before he placed the toe box of his left boot upon the opposite side of the trap. Using his weight to lower the left side of the lever, Darcy paused only long enough to suck in a steadying breath. Squatting awkwardly over the device, Darcy reached down to capture the curve of Elizabeth’s ankle in his gloved hand. He wished he could shift his weight to keep his balance, but any swift movement could release the trap again.

Patiently, he lifted Elizabeth’s foot, bending her leg at the knee. There were several jab wounds in the creamy skin of her exposed calf, and her ankle appeared badly bruised and swollen. Inch by terrifying inch, Darcy lifted her foot higher. When he cleared her limb of the trap, Darcy removed his right foot, and the lever slammed against his cane. Keeping a tight grasp upon her foot, he released the left side. This time, his cane cracked and bent. Free to rest Elizabeth’s foot again upon the ground, Darcy gently lowered her leg to rest upon the grassy area. Standing to look upon his work Darcy’s eyes fell upon the trap. In anger, he caught the bent metal of his hidden sword and tossed the trap against the side of a nearby tree.

Clear at last, Darcy dropped to his knees beside Elizabeth.

“I have you,” he chanted as he rolled Elizabeth to her back. Darcy used his handkerchief to wipe away the trickle of blood from her nose. Unconscious, Elizabeth did not fight him, and Darcy took a perverted pleasure in having the right to tend her.

“You shall have a black eye, my love,” he observed as Darcy checked her arms and legs for any broken bones. With the release of the pressure upon Elizabeth’s ankle, the puncture wounds began to bleed, and Darcy stripped off his cravat to wrap about her leg. He would like to remove her boot, but he suspected he could cause Elizabeth more injury if he did so.

Instead, Darcy loosened the fastenings of Elizabeth’s cloak to toss it upon his discarded coat. He would leave both garments until later.

“Come, Love,” Darcy spoke in soft tones as he lifted Elizabeth to him. Her breathing was even, which gave Darcy hope. “Like it or not, Elizabeth Bennet, after your recovery, you will be Mrs. Darcy. You are thoroughly compromised, my girl.”

Darcy turned his steps toward Rosings Park. Lady Catherine would disapprove of his actions, but he would not permit his aunt to hush up his actions. One way or another, Darcy meant to have Elizabeth as his wife. Darcy assured his pride that she would learn to return his affections once he had her alone at Pemberley. His ancestral estate would work its magic on Miss Elizabeth’s heart, and he would have her in his bed each night.

“My wish is for you and children,” Darcy whispered into Elizabeth’s hair.

With tails wagging and playful yips, the dogs rushed ahead of him as Darcy wove his way along the tree-rooted path. Neither he nor the animals took note of a dark figure stepping from behind a tree. The man scooped u[ Darcy’s coat and pistol from the ground. Turning to where he had hid while Darcy tended Miss Elizabeth, the interloper bent to gather the pages of the long-forgotten letter.

With a smile of conniving, the man saluted Darcy’s retreating form. The interloper refolded the pages and slipped them into his jacket pocket, along with the pistol, before disappearing the way he came.

Posted in Austen Authors, Bells, book excerpts, Jane Austen, Living in the Regency, marriage, Pride and Prejudice, reading, reading habits, Regency era, romance, Vagary | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on A Closer Look at “Mr. Darcy’s Fault: A Pride and Prejudice Vagary”

“Whiskey in the Jar,” a Traditional Irish Ballad

A traditional Irish song, “Whiskey in the Jar,” is about a Rapparee or Highwayman, whose wife/lover betrayed him. It is a widely popular tune that had know a number of professional recordings including: Séamus Ennis, Burl Ives, The Highwaymen, the Limeliters, the Seekers, Peter, Paul, and Mary, Darby O’Gill, Metallica, Celtic Thunder, Roger Whittaker and the Irish Rovers.  The sound’s “action” takes place in the County Cork and County Kerry in the Mangerton Mountains, with specific mention of Fenit, a village in Kerry. 

The song likely dates back to the 17th Century and deals with the exploits of Patrick Fleming, a highwayman. Poems have been written about Fleming’s deeds named, including The Ballad of Patrick Flemming or Patrick Flemmen he was a Valiant Soldier. These poems are said to be the foundation for Whiskey in the Jar. Many believe that the song and legend inspired John Gay to write The Beggar’s Opera in 1728. The song’s origins come from the traditional folk song “The Highwayman and the Captain.” The song became a “signature song” of the Irish folk band, the Dubliners. It appears upon three of their albums. 

Whiskey_in_the_Jar_-_Thin_Lizzy

Fair Use ~ via Wikipedia ~ This is the cover art for the 7-inch single “Whiskey in the Jar” by the artist Thin Lizzy. The cover art copyright is believed to belong to the label, Decca Records, or the graphic artist(s).

 According to Wikipedia, “Whiskey in the Jar is the tale of a highwayman or footpad who, after robbing a military or government official, is betrayed by a woman; whether she is his wife or sweetheart is not made clear. Various versions of the song take place in Kerry, Kilmoganny, Cork, Sligo Town, and other locales throughout Ireland. It is also sometimes placed in the American South, in various places among the Ozarks or Appalachians,  possibly due to Irish settlement in these places. Names in the song change, and the official can be a Captain or a Colonel, called Farrell or Pepper among other names. The protagonist’s wife or lover is sometimes called Molly, Jenny, or Ginny among various other names. The details of the betrayal are also different, being either betraying him to the person he robbed and replacing his ammunition with sand or water, or not, resulting in his killing the person. The song appeared in a form close to its modern version in a precursor called “The Sporting Hero, or, Whiskey in the Bar” in a mid-1850s broadsheet.”

LYRICS: As I was a goin’ over the far famed Kerry mountains
I met with captain Farrell and his money he was counting
I first produced my pistol and I then produced my rapier
Saying “Stand and deliver” for he were a bold deceiver

Mush-a ring dumb-a do dumb-a da
Wack fall the daddy-o, wack fall the daddy-o
There’s whiskey in the jar

I counted out his money and it made a pretty penny
I put it in me pocket and I took it home to Jenny
She sighed and she swore that she never would deceive me
But the devil take the women for they never can be easy

Mush-a ring dumb-a do dumb-a da
Wack fall the daddy-o, wack fall the daddy-o
There’s whiskey in the jar

I went up to my chamber, all for to take a slumber
I dreamt of gold and jewels and for sure ‘t was no wonder
But Jenny blew me charges and she filled them up with water
Then sent for captain Farrell to be ready for the slaughter

Mush-a ring dumb-a do dumb-a da
Wack fall the daddy-o, wack fall the daddy-o
There’s whiskey in the jar

And ‘t was early in the morning, just before I rose to travel
Up comes a band of footmen and likewise captain Farrell
I first produced me pistol for she stole away me rapier
I couldn’t shoot the water, so a prisoner I was taken

Mush-a ring dumb-a do dumb-a da
Wack fall the daddy-o, wack fall the daddy-o
There’s whiskey in the jar

There’s some take delight in the carriages a rolling
and others take delight in the hurling and the bowling
but I take delight in the juice of the barley
and courting pretty fair maids in the morning bright and early

Mush-a ring dumb-a do dumb-a da
Wack fall the daddy-o, wack fall the daddy-o
There’s whiskey in the jar

And if anyone can aid me ‘t is my brother in the army
If I can find his station in Cork or in Killarney
And if he’ll go with me, we’ll go rovin’ through Killkenney
And I’m sure he’ll treat me better than my own a-sporting Jenny

Mush-a ring dumb-a do dumb-a da
Wack fall the daddy-o, wack fall the daddy-o
There’s whiskey in the jar

Listen to Metallica’s “Whiskey in the Jar”

Listen to Thin Lizzy’s “Whiskey in the Jar” 

Listen to the Dubliners’ “Whiskey in the Jar”  (my preferred version)

Additional Resources: 

The History of Lyrics of ‘Whiskey in the Jar’

The Long and Winding Road of ‘Whiskey in the Jar’ 

“Whiskey in the Jar”: History and Transformation of a Classic Irish Song

 

 

Posted in ballads, music, romantic verse, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 3 Comments

The Roots of Primogeniture and Entailments

The concept of “love and romance” were never required in marriage among the English aristocracy. Certainly there were some who did marry for love, but early on, the idea of marriage became a “business transaction,” instead of a romantic joining of like minds. For many, a genuine obstacle to matrimony was financial considerations, including the idea of inheritance, marriage settlements, entailments, and primogeniture. Marriages were made between those of the same social circle in order to secure a blood line or to secure property. Marriage settlements were contracts that aligned those “…within the landed class. The business side of [such] arrangements were shrouded under a sacred cloth of tradition and accepted formality, and solicitors were usually left to deal with the legal intricacies. Contributions towards a couple’s maintenance and provisions for offspring of the marriage came from the two families involved. The contribution from the wife’s family was known as the dowry, or portion, and this was settled on the couple, though the husband usually held control of it.…” (Montgomery, Gilded Prostitution. Status, money, and transatlantic marriages, 69)

31hsgAZpnrL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_ Women’s lack of educational and professional opportunities throughout history prevented them from acquiring their own wealth and independence. This situation was exacerbated by the common law practice of primogeniture, which left women with little choice but to secure their social status and economic welfare through marriage.

Let us look at how the custom of primogeniture became the law of primogeniture and how history changed marriage and family life within the aristocracy of England.

Primogeniture, as practiced in Great Britain, is a distinct combination of law and custom. It finds its roots firmly planted in the time of feudal lords presenting land grants to knights who served them well. Primogeniture is also the creation of law because it serves as a fixed rule of succession in case of intestacy with a preference being bestowed upon the eldest son in wills and settlements regarding landed estates.

HSMaine.jpg To understand primogeniture as it is practiced in England, one must possess a working knowledge of the history of the custom. Sir Henry Maine, a British comparative jurist and historian of the mid 1800s, tells us, There are always certain ideas existing antecedently on which the sense of convenience works, and of which it can do no more than form some new combination; and to find these ideas in the present case is exactly the problem.[Maine, Ancient Law, 226]

220px-Sir_William_Blackstone_from_NPG.jpg In William Blackstones Commentaries on the Laws of England, the author addresses the lawof primogeniture as it applies to inheritance of land ab intestate, referring to laws governing the succession of property after its previous owner dies without a valid will.  With primogeniture, males take precedence over females, and where two or more males exist in equal degree, the eldest alone inherits.

Some experts purport that Aryan law and the laws relating to the land tenures of lower Bengal serve as the beginnings of primogeniture. However, researchers cannot unequivocally claim that primogeniture belonged to the customs of these early societies, nor does it find its origin in the annals of the early Roman Empire, for the practice of primogeniture is at variance with the principle of equality, which operated in those communities, where the eldest son held no advantage over his siblings. Maine [Ancient Law, 134] claims, An absolutely equal divisions of assets among the male children at death is the practice most usual with society at the period when family dependency is in the first stages of disintegration.

However, this statement does not take into account Irelands Brehon Code, which not only divides the assets equally among all children of the marriage, but also accepts the claims of illegitimate children. Nor does it address the Anglo-Saxon custom of gavelkind, which has prevailed in Kent and Wales and parts of Ireland into the present day. Under the Solonian constitution, the Athenian State set the law of succession to mean that all sons inherited equally, with the only privilege claimed by the eldest was that of first choice of division.

In application, primogeniture cannot be traced to a time before feudalism. Although we know difficulty in defining the means by which the practice came into being, we do know that when land ownership equaled power and wealth, keeping the disputed land intact became all important. Primogeniture owes its longevity to politics and economics. Land grants and honorary feuds,with their attached titles of nobility, laid the groundwork for primogeniture as a form of succession. The feudal lord was not indebted to family law, as were allodial property owners who occupied the land and held it in defense of a takeover. The feudal lord expected his tenants to meet certain obligations, especially that of serving in the lords army. When the father passed, the eldest son was the most logical replacement for the tenants feudal responsibilities. The need to have but one head to speak for the family was important in these early states. The eldest son became invested by the feudal system because he was expected to assume his fathers position in service to the lord. Even so, the feudal system, at least in its early stages, did allow for the ruling lords preferences. Occasionally, the feudal duties fell to a younger son.

Although we also cannot name the exact date when the Common Law of England replaced gavelkind and socage fees, it was sometime before the end of the thirteenth century. The use of entailments also occurred about the same time.

Resources: 

Blackstone, William. Commentaries on the Law of England. Clarendon Press, Oxford. 1766. 

Maine, Sir Henry Summer. Ancient Law: Its Connection to the Early History of Society, and Its Relation to Modern Ideas [New York, Henry Holt & Co., 1964], 134.

Montgomery, Maureen E. Gilded Prostitution. Status, money, and transatlantic marriages, 1870 – 1919. [Routledge, 1989], Published August 6, 2013, Amazon Digital Services. 96.

Posted in Act of Parliament, British history, estates, Living in the UK, political stance, primogenture, titles of aristocracy | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Exogamous and Endogamous Marriages in Austen’s Works

Brittanica.com defines an “endogamous marriage” as the custom enjoining one to marry within one’s own group, while Wikipedia says “endogamy” is the practice of marrying within a specific ethnic group, class, or social group, rejecting others on such a basis as being unsuitable for marriage or for other close personal relationships.The penalties for transgressing endogamous restrictions have varied greatly among cultures and have ranged from death to mild disapproval. Endogamous marriages are designed to keep a blood line pure or to create a dynasty by consolidating a family/house/community. British royalty have known this practice from its beginning, and many other examples exist in history.

Anne Elliot and Lady Russell

Anne Elliot and Lady Russell

In Austen’s work, we can think of several such marriages. Lady Catherine De Bourgh wished Darcy to marry her daughter Anne, consolidating the family ties and blood lines. Edmund Bertram marries his cousin Fanny. Charles Musgrove proposes to Anne Elliot, but when Lady Russell dissuades Anne in hopes of a better connection, Musgrove marries Mary Elliot, keeping the connections between the most important families of the community intact.

An exogamous marriage, on the other hand is a union of opposites. This might be political, social, or temperamental foes. The purpose of an exogamous marriage is to inject new blood into one of the Nation’s most revered and ruling families. The New Zealand Slavanic Journal says, exogamy is marriage outside a social group. “In social studies, exogamy is viewed as a combination of two related aspects: biological and cultural. Biological exogamy is marriage of non blood-related beings, regulated by forms of incest law. A form of exogamy is dual exogamy, in which two groups engage in continual wife exchange.” Cultural exogamy is the marrying outside of a specific cultural group. (New Zealand Slavonic Journal, Victoria University of Wellington, 2002, Volumes 35-36, p.81)

Henry Tilney and Catherine Morland

Henry Tilney and Catherine Morland

The most obvious examples of exogamous marriages in Austen is Darcy and Elizabeth in Pride and Prejudice, Captain Frederick Wentworth and Anne Elliot in Persuasion,  and Henry Tilney and Catherine Moreland in Northanger Abbey.

Fitzwilliam Darcy and Elizabeth Bennet

Fitzwilliam Darcy and Elizabeth Bennet

Some would say the same of George Knightley and Emma Woodhouse’s joining, but in many ways their marriage is also endogamous: The Woodhouses and the Knightleys are the leaders of Highbury society, and the Knightley/Woodhouse marriage will restore the portion of Donwell Abbey that the Woodhouses have claimed as part of the marriage settlement of Isabella Woodhouse. Also, Knightley and Emma are related by marriage. Knightley’s brother is Emma’s brother-in-law.

The weddings in Austen’s works are always financially and socially advantageous for the heroine. We, generally, assume this phenomenon occurs because Austen recognized the sting of inequalities in marriage during the Regency. Gentlemen chose women based on their abilities to deliver an heir. Not for love. Not for her intelligence. Unless the woman possessed the qualities of an “accomplished” lady

Miss Bingley

Miss Bingley

[[Miss Bingley:] “Oh! certainly,” cried his faithful assistant, “no [woman] can be really esteemed accomplished who does not greatly surpass what is usually met with.  A woman must have a thorough knowledge of music, singing, drawing, dancing, and the modern languages, to deserve the word; and besides all this, she must possess a certain something in her air and manner of walking, the tone of her voice, her address and expressions, or the word will be but half-deserved.”], she was not considered good marriage material.

We also learn from these marriages that some of those who marry for economic advantage are considered “weak minded” or “selling out.” For example, Charlotte Lucas’s acceptance of Mr. Collins is looked upon by Austen, the character Elizabeth Bennet, and Austen’s readers as an abomination.

Mrs. Bennet criticizes Elizabeth’s refusal of Mr. Collins with these words:

“Ay, there she comes, looking as unconcerned as may be, and caring no more for us than if were at York, provided she can have her own way. But I tell you what, Miss Lizzy, if you take it into your head to go on refusing every offer of marriage in this way, you will never get a husband at all; and I am sure I do not know who is to maintain you when your father is dead. I shall not be able to keep you — and so I warn you. I have done with you from this very day.”

Later, when Elizabeth learns of Charlotte’s engagement to Mr. Collins, Elizabeth is astonished.

The possibility of Mr. Collins’ fancying herself in love with her friend had once occurred to Elizabeth within the last day or two; but that Charlotte could encourage him seemed almost as far from possibility as that she could encourage him herself; and her astonishment was consequently so great as to overcome at first the bounds of decorum, and she could not help crying out: “Engaged to Mr. Collins! my dear Charlotte — impossible!”

Charlotte responds with…

“I see what you feeling, you must be surprised very much surprised, so lately as Mr. Collins was wishing to marry you. But when you have had time to think it all over, I hope you will be satisfied with what I have done. I am not romantic, you know — I never was. I ask only a comfortable home; and considering Mr. Collins’ character, connections, and situation in life, I am convinced that my chance of happiness with him is as fair as most people can boast on entering the marriage state.”

It was a long time before she [Elizabeth] became at all reconciled to the idea of so unsuitable a match. The strangeness of Mr. Collins’ making two offers of marriage in three days was nothing in comparison of his being now accepted. She had always felt that Charlotte’s opinion of matrimony was not exactly like her own; but she could not have supposed it possible that, when called into action, she [Charlotte] would have sacrificed every better feeling to worldly advantage. Charlotte, the wife of Mr. Collins, was a most humiliating picture! And to the pang of a friend disgracing herself, and sunk in her esteem, was added the distressing conviction that it was impossible for that friend to be tolerably happy in the lot she had chosen.

Others in Austen’s works have known unequal marriages.

The opening lines of Mansfield Park address the inequality between Sir Thomas and Lady Bertram. About thirty years ago Miss Maria Ward, of Huntingdon, with only seven thousand pounds, had the good luck to captivate Sir Thomas Bertram, of Mansfield Park, in the county of Northampton, and to be thereby raised to the rank of a baronet’s lady, with all the comforts and consequences of an handsome house and large income. Like Mr. Bennet in Pride and Prejudice, Sir Thomas marries a woman who was a beauty in her youth. Unfortunately, Lady Bertram becomes neurotic, a hypochondriac, and lazy. She values people’s attractiveness over all else. Meanwhile, Mrs. Bennet is a foolish, noisy woman whose only goal in life is to see her daughters married. Because of her low breeding and often unbecoming behavior, Mrs. Bennet often repels the very suitors whom she tries to attract for her daughters.

Mr. William Elliot

Mr. William Elliot

Such revelations leads one to wonder whether “being entranced” by the opposite sex leads to disappointment in marriage. Please note how Austen’s heroines must turn from the “charms” of unworthy gentlemen [Wickham, Willoughby, William Elliot, etc.] to discover contentment in marriage. Is Austen giving us her opinions of cads and scoundrels? Let us face the truth, the gentlemen these heroines claim are often something of a prig, a man of unbending principles. Is this Austen’s idea of honor? Do you suppose our dearest Jane ever knew such a man? Did she know the disappointment of unrequited love?

I look forward to your insights. Comment below and let’s have a conversation.

Posted in British history, Great Britain, Jane Austen, Living in the Regency, marriage, real life tales, Regency era, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Why Do We Return Again and Again to the Classics? a Guest Post from Katherine Reay

My fellow Austen Author, Katherine Reay, discusses her love of the Classics. Please share with her your favorite Classic literature when you are finished reading.

If you’ve read Dear Mr. Knightley or Lizzy & Jane, you know I keep returning to these beloved favorites and, from the title alone, photoIMG_4286you can tell The Bronte Plot will be no different. The Classics have me hooked.

When asked about this, it’s usually assumed that I studied literature in school and come to this adoration with a very firm scholarly backing. Let me be very clear – I don’t. I approach the Classics (note that reverent capital “C”) with a writer’s interest and a reader’s adoration. And, I think, one of the reasons that I love them is because, not only are they beautifully written, but 100, 200, 300 years later, they still speak to us. We use them in our daily conversations (at least I do); they form our world views and feel as real to us often as our own friends and family. These books, that have stood the test of time and touch upon emotions, motivations, issues and eternal concerns that are still alive and relevant.

For example:

I was taught what was right, but I was not taught to correct my temper. I was given good principles, but left to follow them in pride and conceit.

Austen penned that for Mr. Darcy in Pride and Prejudice, but doesn’t she also capture the universality of men, gentleman, parenting and discipline? Goodness, I’m now looking at my own son and hope against hope I’m getting it right.

51ef-UI-b6L._AC_US218_ And, while we may think of these stories within the historical fiction genre, they were often cutting-edge contemporary novels at publication, breaking new literary ground and digging into issues previously untouched – pushing the boundaries of storytelling, setting and character. In fact, Jane Eyre is credited for single-handedly ushering in the more emotional, character-focused novel. Today we call it “literary fiction.”

I firmly believe these novels still have much in them to delight us and tell us… Here are three that I’ve been enjoying lately:


41fpTaGQ5tL._AC_US218_ Bram Stoker’s Dracula. How did this one ever pass by my radar? I finally dug into it a few months ago and loved it! It’s incredibly creepy and I love that a book written in 1897 can still make my skin crawl. Death and decay seeped into every page and my dreams. Wow!

Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre. This is an absolute favorite of mine and it plays a large role in my next novel. Bronte fashioned a fascinating character in Jane – so much change, passion and vulnerability. And the scope of the novel reaches farther than that – you see social movement, British imperialism, changing thoughts on religion and justice all within the pages. And, for me, a great attraction is Bronte’s strong and symbolic secondary characters, such as Rochester and St. John.

41V7x+2dDGL._SX325_BO1,204,203,200_ Jane Austen’s Persuasion. It has to be mentioned – not only because this is “Austen Authors,” but because this book is never far from me. It is my all-time favorite novel (and Lizzy’s favorite in Lizzy & Jane –not a coincidence.) And in this quiet story, Austen is brilliant at laying out huge character struggles in her own understated way and often within a single line.

“I cannot possibly do without Anne,” was Mary’s reasoning; and Elizabeth’s reply was, “Then I am sure Anne had better say, for nobody will want her in Bath.”

Anne, the main character and the middle sister, is caught between the whims of the married younger sister and the domineering older. She has no say, no means and no ability to carry out her own will and you can feel her simultaneously yanked and pushed all way to whiny Mary’s side. Throughout the whole novel, there is such pressure on her that I keep revisiting her journey to discern how Austen made me feel all Anne’s constraints, desires and tensions without spoon-feeding it to me. Brilliant.

So what are some of your favorites? I’d love to know what you think and what’s on your bedside table these days…

61fMd9yU6xL._UX250_Meet Katherine Reay: Katherine Reay has enjoyed a life-long affair with the works of Jane Austen and her contemporaries — who provide constant inspiration both for writing and for life. Katherine’s first novel, Dear Mr. Knightley, was a 2014 Christy Award Finalist and winner of the 2014 INSPY Award for Best Debut as well as Carol Awards for both Best Debut and Best Contemporary. She is also the writer behind Lizzy & Jane and the The Bronte Plot – all contemporary stories with a bit of “classics” flair. Katherine holds a BA and MS from Northwestern University and is a wife, mother, runner, former marketer, avid chocolate consumer and, randomly, a tae kwon do black belt. After living all across the country and a few stops in Europe, Katherine and her family recently moved back to Chicago.

51H+1Cfr2dL._UY250_ 51jroMfdqVL._UY250_ 51UnultghoL._UY250_ 51BrqjlvB9L._UY250_

Posted in Austen Authors, Guest Post, historical fiction, Jane Austen, reading habits | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

The “Running Horse,” a Precursor for the Modern Day Bicycle

220px-KarlDrais.jpg I have changed my diet and added exercise to my daily regime. I am avoiding sugar and glutton, while adding a good bike ride or a long walk to my day. Naturally, as my brain is likely to do, I began to wonder who invented that first bicycle. I had heard that Pierre and Ernest Michaux, the French father and son team of carriage-makers, invented the first bicycle during the 1860s. Historians now disagree and there is evidence that the bicycle is older than that. 

Born 4 April 1785, Friedrich Christian Ludwig Freiherr (= baron) Drais von Sauerbronn is credited with the first bicycle. Drais was a German inventor, who performed as a civil servant for the Grand Duchy of Badenia’s forest service. He was later a professor, teaching mechanical science. He is credited with inventing  a device to record piano music on paper, a stenograph using 16 characters, two four-wheeled human powered vehicles and the two-wheeled velocipede, also called Draisine or hobby-horse, which he presented first time on June 12, 1817 in Mannheim. 
Drais invented the “Laufmaschine” or “Running Machine,” a type of pre-bicycle. The steerable Laufmaschine was made entirely of wood and had no pedals; a rider would push his/her feet against the ground to make the machine go forward. Sauerbronn’s bicycle was first exhibited in Paris on April 6, 1818. The celerifere was another similar early bicycle precursor invented in 1790 by Frenchmen, Comte Mede de Sivrac, however, it had no steering. 

800px-KarlVonDrais

Public Domain ~ via Wikipedia ~ Karl von Drais on his original Laufmaschine, the earliest two-wheeler, in 1819

Drais was a fervent democrat and supported the wave of revolutions that swept Europe. In 1848, he dropped his title and the aristocratic “von” from his name. After the revolution in Baden collapsed, Drais was mobbed and ruined by royalists. His enemies attempted to have him declared insane. In 1838 he survived an assassination attempt.

“The baron’s numerous inventions include a typewriter with 25 keys, the meat grinder, a contraption to record piano music on punched paper, the stenotype machine and a pedal-powered quadricycle. While modern versions of Drais’ meat grinder are still in use in countless butcher shops and households today, the invention that made him famous in 1817 is the Laufmaschine (running machine) – the ancestor of the bicycle.” (The Hobby Horse: 1817

1817_Draisine

https://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/?page_id=40616 ~ a primitive bicycle without a drivetrain. The frame and wheels were made of wood, the steering already resembled a modern handlebar. Riders sat on an upholstered leather saddle nailed to the frame and pushed themselves forward with their feet. The contraption weighed about fifty pounds.

800px-Draisine_or_Laufmaschine,_around_1820._Archetype_of_the_Bicycle._Pic_01

via Wikipedia ~ A Draisine, also called Laufmaschine (“running machine”), from around 1820. The Laufmaschine was invented by the German Baron, Karl von Drais, at Mannheim in 1817. Being the first means of transport to make use of the two-wheeler principle, the Laufmaschine is regarded as the archetype of the bicycle. The above Draisine was built with cherry tree wood and softwood. One is displayed at the Kurpfälzisches Museum in Heidelberg, Germany.

On the American side of the Atlantic, the Baltimore Morning Chronicle declared the invention, Every species of transatlantic nonsense, it would seem, is capable of exciting curiosity, no matter how ridiculous.

Horses were expensive to own, and so the invention held promise. Inventing his vehicles, Drais took notice of the sequence of poor harvests, which started in 1812 and culminated in the volcanic eruption of Mount Tambora in Indonesia in April 1815, setting off what was later called “The Year Without Summer.” In Europe, it snowed during in the summer of 1816, and crops failed. Horses were slaughtered for lack of food even available. The velocipede, therefore, became a potential alternative to horse-based traffic. On Thursday, June 12, 1817, Drais conducted an experiment.  He rode his invention from the centre of Mannheim, Germany, toward Schwetzingen, using Baden’s best road. “After little less than 5 miles (13 kilometers) (half the distance), he turned at the Schwetzinger Relaishaus (located in the today Mannheim’s suburb of Rheinau) and headed home. The round trip took him little more than an hour, but may be seen as the big bang for horseless transport.” (New Biography of Karl Drais) A mid August of the same year, he rode 60 kilometers in four hours, incorporating an umbrella to protect him from the rain and a sail for a windy day. 

Initially, Drais knew success in Paris and London, but as his invention had no brakes, people were soon looking elsewhere for their amusements. During this time, Drais also developed a tricycle and a bicycle built for two version of his running machine. “And although Drais had been granted a privilege – an early type of patent – by the Grand Duke of Badenia in 1818, the running machine never earned a lot of money for its creator. The privilege expired after five years, and the concept of intellectual property rights was still in its infancy. Numerous wagon builders simply copied the design. 

“Yet Drais’ idea did not disappear entirely: In 1819 British coachmaker Denis Johnson started production of an improved draisine in London. Johnson used an iron fork in front and two iron stays in the rear instead of the clunky wooden braces used by Drais. The steering was also much improved and already bore a slight resemblance to a modern headset.” (The Hobby Horse: 1817)

bikead

likely the world’s first bike ad for the running machine of Baron Carl von Drais https://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/?page_id=40616

Resources:BIOGRAPHY OF BARON KARL VON DRAIS~INVENTORS BIKES

Hamer, Mick. “Brimstone and Bicycles”

Karl Drais – the new biography © 2006/2010/2014 ADFC Allgemeiner Deutscher Fahrrad-Club, Kreisverband Mannheim http://www.karl-drais.de

The Hobby Horse: 1817 – Karl Drais and His Running Machine

The Inventors “History of the Bicycle” 

Posted in history, inventions | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

What You Do Not Know About July 4

imrs.jpgOn 2 July 2014, The Washington Post shared a different perspective on July 4, rather than the tale of two countries finding their separate paths. So today, while I am off enjoying a family cookout (something a vegetarian avoids at all costs unless said cookout involves three adorable grandkids), I thought some of you might delight in a shakeup of your American history lessons via Valerie Strauss

What You Know About July 4th is Wrong

Path.jpg

Posted in American History, Austen Authors, British Navy, Canterbury tales, Declaration of Independence, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on What You Do Not Know About July 4

Peerage, Abdication, Inheritance, and Questions of Legality

When reading historical fiction/historical romance the issue of the title the gentleman holds often comes into play. There are many misconceptions, and I admit for those of us in the States, the concept can be a bit confusing.

First thing a reader must know is that not all titles are created equal. For example, a baronet may pass on his title to his heir, but he is not considered part of the Peerage in the United Kingdom. There are some 800+ peers in modern day England whose titles may be inherited. Peers include Dukes/Duchesses, Marquesses/Marchionesses, Earls/Countesses, Viscounts/Viscountesses, and Barons/Baronesses. 

In addition to hereditary peers, ones whose titles can be inherited, there are also Life peers and Representative peers. Life peers are appointed to the peerage, and their titles cannot be inherited. A life peer must meet age and citizenship qualifications under the Life Peerage Act of 1958. Prior to the Act’s passage, a member of the House of Lords had essentially to be male and in possession of an hereditary title (only a few exceptions occurred). Life peers receive the title of baron or baroness and are members of the HOL until their passage. Their legitimate children may assume the privilege of hereditary titles by being address by the prefix “The Honourable.” A representative peer, on the other hand, is  member of the Peerage of Scotland or the Peerage of Ireland, who is elected to sit in the British House of Lords. Representative peers created after 1707 as Peers of Great Britain and after 1801 as Peers of the United Kingdom held the right to sit in the House of Lords. 

What does all this mean exactly? The law that applies to a particular British title depends upon when it was bestowed upon the family and the method of its creation. 

“Peerages of England, Great Britain, and the United Kingdom follow English law; the difference between them is that Peerages of England were created before the Act of Union 1707, Peerages of Great Britain between 1707 and the Union with Ireland in 1800, and Peerages of the United Kingdom since 1800. Irish Peerages follow the law of the Kingdom of Ireland, which is very like English law, except in referring to the Irish Parliament and Irish officials, generally no longer appointed; no Irish peers have been created since 1898, and they have no part in the present governance of the United Kingdom. Scottish Peerage law is generally similar to English law, but differs in innumerable points of detail, often being more similar to medieval practice.” (Hereditary Peer)

Constitution Committee reports on status of the Leader of the ... www.parliament.uk

Constitution Committee reports on status of the Leader of the …
http://www.parliament.uk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A title may be created by a writ of summons, which means that a person is summoned to Parliament. “A writ of summons is a document calling Members of the Lords to Parliament. Members of the House of Lords may not take their seats until they have obtained their writ of summons. Writs of summons are issued by direction of the Lord Chancellor from the office of the Clerk of the Crown in Chancery. New writs are issued before the meeting of each Parliament to all Lords Spiritual and Temporal who have a right to seats in the House.” (Writ of Summons) Writs of summons set out the titles of the Sovereign and the recipient of the writ. They state the reason for Parliament’s calling upon the individual. 

When the Earl of Berkley died, his oldest son applied for a writ of summons to the House of Lords. The Committee on Privilege turned the son down and said he and the other brothers born before 1795 were illegitimate and that the earldom had fallen to the 16 year old born 1796. The boy was too young to do anything about the matter and his oldest brother and mother ran things. When he came of age , he still never put forth a claim to the earldom . However, he was, by right and law, the earl so anything requiring the signature of the earl had to be signed by him. He signed responsibility over to his oldest brother but the title itself went dormant until he died.

Letters patent granting the Dukedom of Marlborough to Sir John Churchill were later amended by Parliament Sir Godfrey Kneller - http://www.artunframed.com/kneller.htm ~ Public Domain

Letters patent granting the Dukedom of Marlborough to Sir John Churchill were later amended by Parliament
Sir Godfrey Kneller – http://www.artunframed.com/kneller.htm ~ Public Domain

Titles may also be created by letters of patent. This method sets out a created peerage and names the person in question. It may limit the course of descent to the male line, with only legitimate children having a right to the title. (Scottish titles permit the “legitimacy” to be determined by a marriage, not simply a marriage at time of the birth.) Traditionally, only the peer sits in the House of Lords, but from the time of Edward IV, an heir to the title (who also held additional titles) could sit in the HOL as one of his father’s subsidiary dignities. This is possible through a writ of acceleration

Letters Patent can be amended by Act of Parliament. If the title was Scottish, the line of descent could remain unspecified. In such a case, Parliament would determine the course of inheritance. Likely, the two most famous examples of amending Letters were the Dukedom of Marlborough in 1706, and the Duke of Windsor in 1936.

“A person who is a possible heir to a peerage is said to be “in remainder”. A title becomes extinct (an opposite to extant, alive) when all possible heirs (as provided by the letters patent) have died out, i.e., there is nobody in remainder at the death of the holder. A title becomes dormant if nobody has claimed the title, or if no claim has been satisfactorily proven. A title goes into abeyance if there is more than one person equally entitled to be the holder.

“In the past, peerages were sometimes forfeit or attainted under Acts of Parliament, most often as the result of treason on the part of the holder. The blood of an attainted peer was considered “corrupted”, consequently his or her descendants could not inherit the title. If all descendants of the attainted peer were to die out, however, then an heir from another branch of the family not affected by the attainder could take the title. The Forfeiture Act 1870 abolished corruption of blood; instead of losing the peerage, a peer convicted of treason would be disqualified from sitting in Parliament for the period of imprisonment.

“The Titles Deprivation Act 1917 permitted the Crown to suspend peerages if their holders had fought against the United Kingdom during the First World War. Guilt was to be determined by a committee of the Privy Council; either House of Parliament could reject the committee’s report within 40 days of its presentation. In 1919, King George V issued an Order in Council suspending the Dukedom of Albany (together with its subsidiary peerages, the Earldom of Clarence and the Barony of Arklow), the Dukedom of Cumberland and Teviotdale (along with the Earldom of Armagh) and the Viscountcy of Taaffe (along with the Barony of Ballymote). Under the Titles Deprivation Act, the successors to the peerages may petition the Crown for a reinstatement of the titles; so far, none of them has chosen to do so (the Taaffe and Ballymote peerages would have become extinct in 1967).

“Nothing prevents a British peerage from being held by a foreign citizen (although such peers cannot sit in the House of Lords). Several descendants of George III were British peers and German subjects; the Lords Fairfax of Cameron were American citizens for several generations.

“A peer may also disclaim a hereditary peerage under the Peerage Act 1963. To do so, the peer must deliver an instrument of disclaimer to the Lord Chancellor within 12 months of succeeding to the peerage, or, if under the age of 21 at the time of succession, within 12 months of becoming 21 years old. If, at the time of succession, the peer is a member of the House of Commons, then the instrument must be delivered within one month of succession; meanwhile, the peer may not sit or vote in the House of Commons. Prior to the House of Lords Act 1999, a hereditary peer could not disclaim a peerage after having applied for a writ of summons to Parliament; now, however, hereditary peers do not have the automatic right to a writ of summons to the House. Irish peerages may not be disclaimed. A peer who disclaims the peerage loses all titles, rights and privileges associated with the peerage; his wife or her husband is similarly affected. No further hereditary peerages may be conferred upon the person, but life peerages may be. The peerage remains without a holder until the death of the peer making the disclaimer, when it descends normally.” (Hereditary Peers)

So what can a person do if he does not wish to accept the title? He could simply refuse to take up the title or touch the money. Technically he would still be the title’s holder, but to have the full title and honors he must be confirmed before Parliament, and all the legal rigmarole has to be done to ensure he is the correct heir. He can simply not claim the title and not style himself by the title (meaning calling himself by the title, i.e., Manchester, Brandon, Northumberland, etc.), but it remains in place and at his disposal. The person does not need to send in the writ of summons to the House of Lords, and he can refuse to use the title, but someone must care for the property, and no one else may claim the title while the heir remains alive. He can also do something drastic, such as commit treason, in which case he and his family would be stripped of the title, but no one would recommend such a step. It would be easier simply not to claim the title.

f8c028dd016b15c3785aec529138b999The Duke of Windsor’s (Edward VIII) abdication was a very complicated legal process, and one Parliament allowed and had to handle legally due to the duke’s marrying a divorced woman, which actually made him unfit to be head of the Church of England, which is a job the King of England must claim, and there are laws about the monarch’s marriages. This situation carried itself forward to the present with Prince Charles marrying Camilla, another situation sorted out legally before Parliament.

Like it or not, the heir can not be disinherited to prevent his assuming the title. If there is a living person and the lawful successor to a title, he cannot be displaced unless convicted of a crime. During the Regency there was no way to disclaim a peerage except by not using it and not sending in a request for a seat in the House of Lords.

Posted in British history, Great Britain, Living in the Regency, real life tales, Regency era, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Peerage, Abdication, Inheritance, and Questions of Legality

2017 Daphne Du Maurier Award Finalist, Twinnings, Child Birth, and a (Sort of) Giveaway

Today, I am taking off my Austen hat to announce that my latest Regency series is making a pleasant noise: Angel Comes to the Devil’s Keep is the first book in a new romantic suspense trilogy: The Twins, and it has been named as a 2017 finalist in the Daphne Du Maurier Award for Excellence in Mystery/Suspense. (Last year, my Austen-inspired mystery, The Prosecution of Mr. Darcy’s Cousin, was also a finalist. You can see the complete list of those nominated HERE.) Needless to say, I have been doing my *Happy Dance* (which I must say is infinitely less entertaining than was Elaine’s in the “Seinfeld” series, for I did dance on Broadway in my youth, and I can keep a beat).  The book comes from Black Opal Books. The second in the series, The Earl Claims His Comfort is tentatively scheduled for release in September, and I am currently writing book three: Lady Chandler’s Sister.

In “Angel” there are several sets of twins. The hero, Huntington McLaughlin, the Marquess of Malvern, is a twin. Malvern and his sister, Henrietta, Viscountess Stoke, are fraternal twins, as are Henrietta’s boys. She is in the family way a second time in the book and obviously expecting twins again. Her husband, Viscount Stoke, is also a twin. Malvern’s father, the Duke of Devilfoard, possesses a twin. Identical twins become part of the plot of second book, and I return to fraternal twins in book three.

One might think that the preponderance of twins in the first book is odd, but Vital Statics available on the possibility of twinning during the 1700s and 1800s can found in a variety of abstracts. For example in the U. S. at the same time, “Vital records of Saybrook and Plymouth in New England from the 17th century were investigated. Among 8,562 maternities 81 twin maternities were found, the twinning rate being 0.95%. Twinning rate was low at the 1st and 2nd births as compared with the 3rd or later births, and was highest at the 7th and 8th births (1.6%). Twin maternity seemed to be a strong risk factor to terminate reproduction, particularly after 6 or more children had been delivered. The rate of mothers who had any other child (“fertile” mothers) at the 7th or later birth order was significantly lower for twin (13%) than for singleton maternities (63%). Twinning rate also varied by the size of offspring of a mother, and those mothers who had 5 or 6 children showed the highest twinning rate (1.3%). Those fertile mothers who had 7 or more children showed the lowest twinning rate (0.74%), although an exceptionally higher twinning rate was seen at their last births. Elongation of the last birth interval was observed for each group of every family size, and higher twinning rates were generally observed at their last births. Reduction in fecundity and rise in twinning rate seem to have occurred simultaneously at the last stage of the reproductive period of mothers, regardless of their family size.” (U. S. National Library of Medicine)

The birth experience during the Regency Era was very difficult for women. We often hear the reason that men chose a younger woman (and women were on “the shelf” at age five and twenty) was that the younger girls were thought better to survive child birth. And no wonder! Did you realize that during this period a woman would experience pregnancy some ten times. The women gave birth an average of six times during their lifetimes. Edward Shorter in Women’s Bodies: A Social History of Women’s Encounter with Health, Ill-Health and Medicine says, “The indifference of men to the physical welfare of women is most striking in regard to childbirth. …child bearing was a woman’s event, occurring with the women’s culture; a man’s primary concern was to see a living heir brought forth. I am not [Shorter] trying to cast the husbands of traditional society as fiends but want merely to show what an unbridgeable sentimental distance separated them from their wives. Under these circumstances it is unrealistic to think that men would abstain from intercourse in order to save women from the physical consequences of repeated childbearing.”

In her book In the Family Way: Childbearing in the British Aristocracy, 1760-1860, Judith Schneid Lewis shares some interesting facts of the time period. Ms. Lewis studied 50 aristocratic women for the book. From these studies we learn that these 50 women averaged 8 children over an eighteen year period. The women in the group married typically at 21 and gave birth to her first child within 2.25 years. They continued to present their husbands with children until the age of 40.

Ms. Lewis tells us that 80% of the women gave birth within two years of marriage, with 50% presenting their husbands with a child within the first year of marriage. The Duchess of Leinster birthed 21 children over a 30 year span. She was 46 years of age when the last one was born.

Typical of the period, a male midwife would ask the woman if she were prepared to “take a pain,” meaning a vaginal examination. For this procedure, a pregnant woman would customarily lie on her left side upon a bed. She would be asked to draw her knees up to her abdomen. This was the position recommended by Doctor Thomas Denman, a prominent male midwife of the period. Denman also cautioned for discretion and tenderness during the examination.

From the examination, the midwife could determine how advanced was the pregnancy, whether the woman’s pelvis was deformed or not, and whether the baby had turned head down. If delivery occurred within 24 hours, it was considered natural. We see much of what happened to Princess Charlotte (daughter of the Prince Regent) as how it was for women during the Regency.

“About 7 o’clock on the evening of Monday, the 3rd of November, at 42 weeks and 3 days gestation, the membranes spontaneously ruptured and labor pains soon followed. The contractions were coming every 8 to 10 minutes and were very mild. Examination of the cervix at that time revealed the tip of the cervix to be about a half penny dilated. On Tuesday morning, around 3 a.m., the 4th of November, Princess Charlotte had a violent vomiting spell and Dr. Croft thinking that delivery was eminent, sent for the officers of the state and Dr. Matthew Baillie.

“The pains continued. They were weak and ineffectual but still sharp enough to be distressing, occurring about 8 minute intervals with little progress in the labor. Around 11:00 a.m. that morning after 16 hours of labor the cervix the size of a crown piece (probably 4 cm). At 6:00 p.m., Tuesday, she was noted to have just an anterior lip of cervix, and by 9:00 p.m., she was completely dilated. At this point, she had had about 26 hours of the first stage of labor.

“Labor advanced, but the progress was very slow. At noon, on Wednesday, the 5th of November after the second stage of labor had gone on for 15 hours, the uterine discharge became a dark green color, which made the medical attendants fear that the child might be dead. Between three and four p.m. after the second stage had gone on for 18 hours, the child’s head began to press on the external parts, and by 9:00 p.m., was born by the action of Charlotte’s pains only.

“The child, a 9 lb. boy, was dead and had evidently been dead for some hours. The umbilical cord was very small and was of a dark green or black color. About ten minutes after the delivery, Sir Richard Croft discovered that the uterus was contracted in the middle in an hourglass form. Approximately 20 minutes later, the princess began to hemorrhage. About 12:45 am. on the 6th of November she complained of great uneasiness in her chest and great difficulty in breathing. Her pulse became rapid, deep and irregular, and she extremely restless and was not able to remain still for a single moment.”(The Death of Princess Charlotte of Wales An Obstetric Tragedy, Charles R. Oberst, Spring 1984) Within hours, the Princess had passed. When we consider such, it is a wonder that any woman of the period would consider the “joys” of childbirth.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Angel Comes to the Devil’s Keep

Huntington McLaughlin, the Marquess of Malvern, wakes in a farmhouse, after a head injury, being tended by an ethereal “angel,” who claims to be his wife. However, reality is often deceptive, and Angelica Lovelace is far from innocent in Hunt’s difficulties. Yet, there is something about the woman that calls to him as no other ever has. When she attends his mother’s annual summer house party, their lives are intertwined in a series of mistaken identities, assaults, kidnappings, overlapping relations, and murders, which will either bring them together forever or tear them irretrievably apart. As Hunt attempts to right his world from problems caused by the head injury that has robbed him of parts of his memory, his best friend, the Earl of Remmington, makes it clear that he intends to claim Angelica as his wife. Hunt must decide whether to permit her to align herself with the earldom or claim the only woman who stirs his heart–and if he does the latter, can he still serve the dukedom with a hoydenish American heiress at his side?

Review: The story is charming, with interesting and realistic characters, a complex plot with plenty of surprises, and a sweet romance woven through it all. The author has a good command of what it was like to be a woman in nineteenth-century England–almost as if she had been there. She really did her research for this one.

Nook * Kobo * Smashwords * Black Opal Books * Amazon

Now for the “Sort of” Giveaway! My publisher, Black Opal Books, has provided me a block of free eBook copies available to readers in exchange for an honest review on Amazon, Nook, Kobo, or Goodreads. If you have accepted this offer previously, I thank you for your willingness to aid me in this matter. If you have not read Angel Comes to the Devil’s Keep and are willing to provide a review within a timely manner (by September 1), please contact me at jeffersregina@gmail.com, and I will make arrangements for you to receive the eBook. This will be a first-come basis. When the freebies are gone, that is the end of the promotion. 

Posted in Black Opal Books, books, British history, Regency era, Regency romance, romance, suspense | Tagged , , , , | 3 Comments