The Places We Visit in Jane Austen’s Novels

Oh, the Places We Will Go…in Austen Novels

Through Jane Austen’s novels, I was first introduced, at the age of 12, to beautiful English estates and a land beyond my imagination. I fell in love with the time, the homes, the heroes and heroines, and I have spent a lifetime admiring Austen’s works. Do you know the many places found within Austen’s novels?

from Persuasion

Lyme Regis – where Louisa Musgrove falls from the Cobb; later falls in love with Captain Benwick

Uppercross – the Musgroves’ family home

the ancient Roman baths in Bath, UK


Bath
– city where the Elliots retrenched and where Anne and Captain Wentworth are reunited

Kellynch Hall – Sir Walter Elliot’s ancestral home

 

________________________

from Northanger Abbey

Putney, London – from where the Thorpes hail

Oxford University

Oxford – where James Morland attends university

Bath – the city Catherine Morland visits; she meets Henry Tilney there

Northanger Abbey, Gloucestershire – the family seat of the Tilney family

Fullerton, Wiltshire – the village from which the Morlands hail

_______________________________

from Emma

Bath – where Mr. Elton travels to secure a wife

panoramicearth.blogspot.com Brunswick Square in Camden - London

Brunswick Square, London – home of John and Isabella Knightley

Donwell Abbey, Surrey – Mr. Knightley’s estate

Randalls, Surrey – where Mr. and Mrs. Weston reside

Hartfield, Surrey – where the Woodhouses live; Emma’s home

Highbury, Surrey – the village near the estates of Hartfield, Randalls, and Donwell Abbey

______________________________

from Mansfield Park

Sotherton – Mr. Rushworth’s estate

800px-stoneleigh_abbey_27j08

Stoneleigh Abbey, the inspiration for Sotherton

 

Portsmouth – the place from where Fanny Price hails; her family resides there

Antigua – Sir Thomas owns a plantation there

London – from which Maria and Julia elope

Thornton Lacey – the clerical living Edmund will receive as part of his orders

Mansfield Parsonage – where first Mr. and Mrs. Norris reside; later it is the home for the Grants; Mary and Henry Crawford visit at the Parsonage

Mansfield Park – the home of the Bertram family and of Fanny Price

_________________________

from Pride and Prejudice

Brighton, Sussex – where George Wickham is stationed; from which he and Lydia Bennet elope

Gracechurch Street, London – home of Mr. and Mrs. Gardiner, Elizabeth Bennet’s maternal uncle and his wife

Hunsford, Kent – Mr. Collins’ parsonage

Rosings Park, Kent – the estate of Lady Catherine De Bourgh; Darcy’s aunt

Chevening House, likely the inspiration for Rosing Park

Chatsworth House, likely the inspiration for Pemberley

Netherfield, Hertfordshire – Mr. Charles Bingley’s let estate

Lucas Lodge, Hertfordshire – home of Sir William Lucas’s family

Meryton, Hertfordshire – the village nearest to Longbourn

Longbourn, Hertfordshire – home to the Bennet family

Pemberley, Derbyshire – Fitzwilliam Darcy’s estate

___________________________

from Sense and Sensibility

Barton-Cottage-in-movie-Sense-and-Sensibility-with-Emma-Thompson.jpg

Cleveland, Somersetshire – the Palmer’s estate; where Marianne Dashwood falls ill

Allenham, Devonshire – the estate Willoughby is to inherit

Berkeley Street, London – Mrs. Jennings’ London address

Combe Magna, Somersetshire – Willoughby’s estate

Delaford, Devonshire – Colonel Brandon’s home

Barton Park – the home of Sir John Middleton

Barton Cottage – the home for the Dashwood sisters and their mother

Norland Park, Sussex – the Dashwood ancestral home

Posted in Austen actors, books, buildings and structures, film adaptations, historical fiction, Jane Austen, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 6 Comments

The Beginnings of the Greyhound Bus Company

334px-Hupmobile_1909-0905_zps13325237.jpgIn 1914, a young Swedish minor named Car Eric Wickman left his job as a diamond drill operator in the rugged Mesabi Iron Ore Range in Hibbing, Minnesota, to open a Hupmobile (Goodyear Tire) franchise. The venture cost him $3000. Except to himself, young Wickman failed to make a single sale, so the enterprising young Swede abandoned his dealership dreams. 

Realizing that most iron miners were too poor to afford their own vehicle, Wickman decided to start transporting workers between Hibbing and Alice, a mining town two miles away. Cramming 15 passengers into his eight-seat “touring car,” the 27-year-old charged 15 cents a ride or 25 cents for a round trip. On his first trip, in 1914, Wickman collected a grand total of $2.25. But 100 years later, that modest sum has grown into nearly a billion dollars in annual revenue.

1909-Hupmobile-Model-20-runabout.jpg The “jitney bus” proved popular with the miners. By moving things about with the bus, Wickman managed to add two extra seats. Passengers also rode on the running boards and fenders of the vehicle. Realizing he required more vehicles, Wickman convinced a blacksmith friend to go into partnership with him. Together, they purchased another Hupmobile. The car was enlarged to seat ten. The two men also expanded their routes. 

The offered their first long-distance route in 1915. It covered ninety-mile stretch between Hibbing and Duluth. In fierce winter weather, drivers were equipped with block and tackle and snow shovels. Meanwhile, passengers were provided with lap rugs and hot bricks for their feet. By 1916, their firm had grown to five members and five buses. Each member served as a director of the firm, as well as a bus driver. 

So the “buses” would not appear dirty on the dusty roads, they were painted a “battleship gray.” An innkeeper along one of their regular routes commented that the hupmobiles resembled a “greyhound dog streaking by.” The name stuck. Some Wickman was advertising: Ride the Greyhounds. 

Greyhound Bus by isriya_0.jpgEventually, Greyhound became part of the name of the company. A one-man, four-miles route in Minnesota became the world’s largest inter-city passenger carrier. “Wickman, it turns out, pretty much invented intercity bus travel—which for most Americans equals Greyhound, the company that emerged from that long-ago Hupmobile ride. ‘Greyhound has become generic for bus travel,’ says Robert Gabrick, author of Going The Greyhound Way. ‘Like Kleenex for tissues.’ Indeed, this classic American business icon—which, as it happens, is now owned by a British conglomerate—today has more than 7,300 employees, with estimated yearly sales of $820 million and 2,000 buses serving 3,800 destinations in 48 U.S. states and nine Canadian provinces. ‘I’m amazed at Greyhound’s brand recognition,’ says DePaul University professor Joseph Schwieterman, an authority on intercity bus travel. ‘It’s an American success story.'” (100 Years on a Dirty Dog: The History of Greyhound)

 

Posted in American History, buildings and structures, business, commerce, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

“God Save the Queen,” British National Anthem

“God Save the Queen,” also called (during a kingship) God Save the King, British royal and national anthem. The origin of both the words and the music is obscure. The many candidates for authorship include John Bull (c. 1562–1628), Thomas Ravenscroft (c. 1583–c. 1633), Henry Purcell (c. 1639–95), and Henry Carey (c. 1687–1743). The earliest copy of the words appeared in Gentleman’s Magazine in 1745; the tune appeared about the same time in an anthology, Thesaurus Musicus—in both instances without attribution.

“The origins of ‘God Save the Queen’ are lost in obscurity, but there is no doubt whatever that the words and the tune, as we know them today, suddenly became widely popular in September, 1745. In that month, demonstrations of loyalty to the reigning house were in special demand. Prince, Charles Edward, the Young Pretender, had routed Cope at Prestonpans, and was about to invade England; London was preparing to defend itself and its Hanoverian rulers. An example of popular feeling was given on September 28th when the entire male caste of Drury Lane theatre announced their intention of forming a special unit of the Volunteer Defence Force. That evening they gave a performance of Jonson’s The Alchemist. At its conclusion there was an additional item. Three of the leading singers of the day—Mrs. Cibber, Beard and Reinhold —stepped forward and began a special anthem:

“God bless our Noble King,

God Save great George our King …”

“The Daily Advertiser reported: “The universal applause sufficiently denoted in how just an Abhorrence they (the audience) hold the Arbitrary Schemes of our invidious enemies. …” The other theatres were quick to follow Drury Lane. Benjamin Victor, the linen merchant, wrote to his friend Garrick, who was ill in the country: “The stage is the most loyal place in the three kingdoms,” and Mrs. Cibber noted: “The Rebellion so far from being a disadvantage to the playhouses, brings them very good houses.” Soon the anthem was being sung as far afield as Bath.” (History TodayIt soon became the custom for the song to greet the sovereign whenever he or she arrived. 

In 1746, George Frideric Handel used it in his Occasional Oratorio, which dealt with the tribulations of the Jacobite Rebellion of ’45. Thereafter, the tune was used frequently by composers making British references, notably by Ludwig van Beethoven, who used it in seven variations.

it_is_far_better_to_face_the_bullets

The phrase “God Save the King” in use as a rallying cry to the support of the monarch and the nation’s forces (via Wikipedia)

From Great Britain the melody passed to continental Europe, becoming especially popular in Germany and Scandinavia, with a variety of different lyrics. Later, in the United States, Samuel F. Smith (1808–95) wrote “My Country ’Tis of Thee” (1832), to be sung to the British tune; it became a semiofficial anthem for the nation, second in popularity only to “The Star-Spangled Banner.”

It is the national anthem of the United Kingdom and one of two national anthems used by New Zealand since 1977, as well as for several of the UK’s territories that have their own additional local anthem. It is also the royal anthem of all the aforementioned countries, as well as Australia (since 1984), Canada (since 1980), Barbados and Tuvalu. In countries not previously part of the British Empire, the tune of “God Save the Queen” has provided the basis for various patriotic songs, though still generally connected with royal ceremony.The melody is also used for the national anthem of Liechtenstein, Oben am jungen Rhein  (“Up above the Young Rhine”).

Beyond its first verse, which is consistent, “God Save the Queen/King” has many historic and extant versions. Since its first publication, different verses have been added and taken away and, even today, different publications include various selections of verses in various orders. In general, only one verse is sung. Sometimes two verses are sung, and on rare occasions, three.

“God Save the Queen”
(standard version)

God save our gracious Queen!
Long live our noble Queen!
God save the Queen!
Send her victorious,
Happy and glorious,
Long to reign over us:
God save the Queen!

O Lord our God arise,
Scatter her enemies,
And make them fall:
Confound their politics,
Frustrate their knavish tricks,
On Thee our hopes we fix:
God save us all.

Thy choicest gifts in store,
On her be pleased to pour;
Long may she reign:
May she defend our laws,
And ever give us cause,
To sing with heart and voice,
God save the Queen!

When the monarch of the time is male, “Queen” is replaced with “King” and all feminine pronouns (in bold type) are replaced with their masculine equivalents.

You may hear “God Save the Queen” HERE on You Tube.

 

Resources: 

CMUSE

“God Save the Queen,” Encyclopædia Britannica

“God Save the Queen,” International Business Times 

“God Save the Queen,” Wikipedia 

Posted in British history, Georgian England, royalty | Tagged , , , , , | 4 Comments

Did Richard II “Invent” the Handkerchief?

Okay, I will admit up front the history of Richard II’s reign is NOT my area of expertise, and so I do NOT mean this piece as a “history” lesson. Rather it is meant to be an interesting historical “tidbit.” You decide whether Richard II had a “hand” (get it???) in the invention of the “handkerchief.” 

A Pageant of Kings: Richard II -- the King Who Could Not Fight

Richard II and Anne of Bohemia

 That being said, Tim Shaw’s Daily Medieval tells us, “Richard II (1367-1400) had all of the elegance and none of the political savvy or military skill required of a king of England in the 14th century. He was given to–and ridiculed for–extravagances and fastidiousness that shocked many of his contemporaries. In an attempt to curb his excesses, he was put under the regency of a council called the Lords Appellant. Richard decided to negotiate a peace with France and devote his energies and finances to overthrowing the Lords Appellant. The Merciless Parliament of 1388 was called to curb him. During the process, Parliament convicted most of Richard’s advisors of treason. The charges against them include lists of extravagances such as richly decorated garments and household furnishings.

“At a time when such excesses were worthy of condemnation, something like the following line–a description of an order from the king’s tailor, Walter Rauf–would surely make heads turn and eyes roll:

parvis peciis factis ad liberandum domino regi ad portandum in manu suo pro naso suo tergendo et mundando

“small pieces made for giving to the lord king to carry in his hand for wiping and cleaning his nose”

“Why does this stand out? Prior to this, the sleeve was the primary receptacle for the things for which we now use handkerchiefs or tissues. Stella Mary Newton, in her Fashion in the Age of the Black Prince,  does not find any evidence of handkerchief use in the courts of Europe. This seems to counter the theory that Richard picked up this “foppish” practice from France.* We know the Romans used a piece of cloth called a sudarium for wiping sweat, but that is not likely where Richard got the idea, since there is no evidence that the sudarium survived as a custom in Europe. So maybe Richard did invent the pocket handkerchief.”

*Richard was raised in France, where his father, Edward the Black Prince, held much land thanks to Edward III’s successes in the Hundred Years War. In fact, it’s pretty certain that Richard never bothered to learn English.

Meanwhile, BBC History tells us, “Richard is the first king that we know for sure what he looked like, in part because of his own conscious attempts to raise the personal place of the monarch, through the active use of imagery and artistic representation, the most notable example being the Wilton Diptych, a portable altarpiece and Richard’s own portrait, which now hangs in Westminster Abbey. Richard constructed the first royal bathhouse, may well have invented the pocket handkerchief and used a spoon for the first time. In his patronage of architecture and personal piety, his reign has a powerful legacy in some of the key parts of Westminster Great Hall, York Minster and Canterbury Cathedral. Richard built the magnificent hammer beam roof for the hall, which can be seen to this day. The medieval parliament and king’s court often sat under its carved angels and it was from here that the kingdom was ruled.”

In Mr. Giotto’s Online Textbook, under “The Kings of England: Richard II and Three Henrys,” we are told, “Richard, unlike his grandfather and father, did not care for carrying on the war with the French. On the contrary, he enjoyed French cooking, creating the first royal cookbook. Richard was into manners, he created the first handkerchief, as he was appalled by the habit of wiping one’s mouth or nose on his or her sleeve at the dinner table.”

220px-Handkerchief.jpg Rampley & Co. of London gives us a bit more information regarding the History of the Pocket Square. “Some people believe that the pocket square in one form or another can trace its origins back to ancient Egypt, where small linen cloths were dyed with a red powder that indicated they were used for decorative purposes and as an example of wealth. However, this is quite a leap of faith and small pieces of coloured cloth don’t necessarily translate directly into what you would consider a modern day pocket square.

“There are also those that trace it back to the Ancient Greeks who carried a cloth with scented perfume in order to ensure they always had a pleasant smell nearby or the Romans who used pieces of cloth to start the Gladiatorial Games, with the event starting when the Emperor dropped his handkerchief.

“Some claim the first use of a handkerchief being worn as an accessory was in 800’s where members of the Catholic Church would attach a white handkerchief to their left arm as a representation of their devotion to God and their church or that King Richard II of England was the first person to wear a handkerchief as a fashion accessory while on the throne between 1377 to 1399. Although it’s clear people have been using squares of material for various uses for a long time, we’re not convinced that this is a justifiable comparison to what is now deemed a pocket square.”

Finally, Wikipedia tells us, “Before people used the word handkerchief, the word kerchief alone was common. This term came from two French words: couvrir, which means “to cover,” and chef, which means “head.” In the times of ancient Greece and Rome, handkerchiefs were often used the way they are today. But in the Middle Ages, kerchiefs were usually used to cover the head. Then in the 16th century, people in Europe began to carry kerchiefs in their pockets to wipe their forehead or their nose. To distinguish this kind of kerchief from the one used to cover the head, the word “hand” was added to “kerchief”. King Richard II of England, who reigned from 1377 to 1399, is widely believed to have invented the cloth handkerchief, as surviving documents written by his courtiers describe his use of square pieces of cloth to wipe his nose. Certainly they were in existence by Shakespeare’s time, and a handkerchief is an important plot device in his play Othello.” 

Posted in British history, fashion, history, legends, medieval | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Did Richard II “Invent” the Handkerchief?

Princess Helena Escape Queen Victoria’s “Heavy Thumb”

220px-Helena_scan.jpg Princess Helena (Helena Augusta Victoria; Princess Christian of Schleswig-Holstein by marriage; 25 May 1846 – 9 June 1923) was the third daughter and fifth child of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert. Like the queen’s other children, Helena was educated by private tutors chosen by her father and his close friend and adviser, Baron Stockmar. At her birth, Albert reported to his brother, Ernest II, the Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, that Helena “came into this world quite blue, but she is quite well now”. He added that the Queen “suffered longer and more than the other times and she will have to remain very quiet to recover.”

Helena was a lively and outspoken child, and reacted against brotherly teasing by punching the bully on the nose. Her early talents included drawing. Like her sisters, she could play the piano to a high standard at an early age. Other interests included science and technology, shared by her father Prince Albert, and horseback riding and boating, two of her favourite childhood occupations. However, Helena became a middle daughter following the birth of Princess Louise in 1848, and her abilities were overshadowed by her more artistic sisters.

Queen Victoria’s Daughters tell us, “Helena was always known within the family as Lenchen. Finding a husband for her was problematic for the queen. The older sisters had been more desirable for several reasons but Lenchen has no seniority in the family, as Vicky had as the eldest daughter. Alice was undoubtedly attractive, unlike Lenchen, who was was rather dumpy.

“To outsiders, Lenchen’s choice of husband seemed to have few attractions. Prince Christian of Schleswig-Holstein was older than his bride (but looked considerably older than he really was, he was impoverished (in royalty terms) and having just left the army, was jobless. But Lenchen fell hook, line and sinker and was determined to marry the prince. But the couple had a close and happy marriage, producing six children.”

princess-helena-1After, Prince Albert’s death, Queen Victoria went into a profound depression that affected the remainder of her reign. Her children still under her care were expected to abandon their youthful pursuits and grieve for their beloved father, as did the Queen. At age sixteen, Helena was barely from the schoolroom, but Victoria’s few thoughts beyond her grief at Albert’s loss turned to finding an appropriate husband for a daughter that she had termed as the “least promising.” Victoria had written that “poor dear Lenchen, though most useful and active and clever and amiable, does not improve in looks and has great difficulty with her figure and her want of calm, quiet, graceful manners.” (Rappaport, Helen. Queen Victoria: A Biographical Companion. ABC-CLIO. Oxford. page 189.)

Helena was not known for her intellectual curiosity, and many would say that she ate her feelings of inadequacy. Even with Lenchen’s “faults,” Victoria called upon her daughter often to assist in the queen’s official duties (especially in Alice’s absence from England). 

In 1862, Victoria took her children on a journey through Germany. They were to visit where Albert had lived as a boy. While visiting their Uncle Leopold at Laeken Palace in Brussels, Lenchen and Princess Louisa took the acquaintance of the Prince Christian of Denmark. During this time they became friends with the prince’s daughters Alexandra (later the wife of the Prince of Wales) and Dagmar. 

220px-1831Christian-05.jpg Three years later on another visit to Germany, Helena met another Prince Christian, this one of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Augustenburg. On the maternal, Prince Christian held ties to a Danish noble family, as well as to the British royal family. His grandmother was the granddaughter of Frederick, King George II’s son. He was 15 years Helena’s senior. Unfortunately, the prince appeared older than he actually was, a fact that Victoria remarked upon on numerous occasions. Moreover, Christian was not the most intelligent of men (certainly nothing in the manner of Victoria’s “dear Albert”). He was not sophisticated or ambitious or very amiable. Nor did he possess a fortune worthy of Victoria’s daughter. Moreover, he had recently left his military post in the Prussian army. 

As Beatrice became the queen’s newest “crutch” in her official capacity, Helena was free to marry. However, Queen Victoria was not one to lose a daughter easily, and so she demanded that Christian and Helena reside in England and near to her own residences. 

According to Jerrold M. Packard in his Victoria’s Daughters (New York. St Martin’s. 1998. pages 112-113, the Prusso-Danish war “… would have a profound impact on Queen Victoria’s third daughter as the Augustenburg family became a second casualty of all this Realpolitik. A younger son of the Augustenburgs, who were a branch of the Schleswig-Holstein family, Christian recognized that his family were no longer practical candidates for a throne of the duchies. This signified that his own future was pretty much bereft of recognizable landmarks, and specifically that he was free from any dynastic responsibility at home. Yet even with the issue of Christian’s political liabilities largely obviated by his family’s loss to Bismark’s scheming and Prussia’s strength, his own personal lack of desirability would drive a wedge between members of Lenchen’s family.” 

Even so, two years passed before Victoria finally agreed to Helena’s joining to Christian. It took place on 5 July 1866 in private chapel at Windsor Castle. Christian who had recently been naturalized wore the uniform of a major general in the British Army, indicating his appropriate station as the son-in-law of the Queen. Victoria gave the bride away. 

Resources: 

“Princess Helena of the United Kingdom,” Wikipedia

“Victoria’s Children, Part 5: Princess Helena,” Nineteen Teen

Posted in Act of Parliament, British history, marriage, Victorian era | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Toilets, or the Lack Thereof, for Georgian Women

512J3dWI1KL._UY250_.jpg In my books, I often have my characters address their personal needs. For example, in A Touch of Grace, my heroine is working in the ladies’ retiring room as a seamstress at a ball, but as she is pregnant, she must sneak around to use the chamber pot that was meant for titled ladies. The heroine, Grace is married to a marquis, but she has run away from her husband and cannot let anyone know her identity. 

But what excuse could a Regency guest have for excusing himself or herself during a supper party? Would he or she say they were going to “freshen up”? What would a man say, and where did he go? Believe it or not, some sources say the men never left the dining room but relieved themselves behind a screen in the same room. I do not know about you, but the thought of sitting at a table and listening to someone urinate behind a screen while I attempted to eat my meal (and not counting the obvious smell) would be a real turn off for me, but I am realistic enough to understand the necessity of such crude designs in the Regency period. If any one seriously had the need to leave the table for personal reasons, a footman would be sent to escort them to the proper facility. 

Ladies did not want to draw attention to themselves leaving the table to go to the toilet. I think most waited until the ladies left the room so the men could enjoy their drink and smoking and then went. The men often used the pot  in the room, so we have heard, as soon as the ladies left. 

I have often heard that women ate and drank very little at balls and social functions because they could not easily discover a means to relieve themselves at these events that lasted for hours on end.

Underwear: Here’s the shocker – women wore very little in the way of underwear as we would define them. (Panties/Knickers) Yes, they wore a chemise, slips, corsets and short-stays but should a stiff breeze kick-up, it is highly likely that our Regency sisters felt a distinct draft-in-the-aft.

Leaving the dining table was very poor manners indeed. I remember reading that the astronomer Tycho Brahe died after a dinner party because his bladder burst. Brahe was long thought to have died from a bladder infection after politeness kept him from excusing himself to use the bathroom during a royal banquet in October 1601, causing his bladder to rupture.

I always assumed it was one of those strict codes of behaviour that dictated not leaving the table once the meal was served, and that’s why men and ladies separated right after the meal, not just for cigars and port, but also for that all-important chamber pot hidden in the cupboard. I assume the ladies had a somewhat more delicate solution. 

francois_boucher__la_bourdaloue_01b

image by Francois Boucher

image1-169-sevres-bourdaloue-ovale-en-porcelaine-tendre-a-decor-en-1

What was a Bourdaloue? – All Things Georgian

From Joana Major and Sarah Murden’s All Things Georgian blog, we learn, “Just prior to the Georgian era, they did have the chamber pot, but that was not very practical to be used in public so they devised an object known as a ‘Bourdaloue’. Personally, we think that the Bourdaloue would have been more discreet to be honest. Rumour was (as no proof seems to exist) that the name of the object evolved courtesy of a Jesuit priest, Louis Bourdaloue who gave such long speeches that could last for hours that ladies needed to relieve themselves.  Another school of thought is that they came about as a result of women not wishing to miss a second of his amazing sermons, either way, whether true or not the ‘Bourdaloue’ evolved.  Certainly he gave his name to part of a hat* which seems far more acceptable. It also seems feasible that the modern word ‘loo’ came from this term, but again we have no proof of this….” It was a boat shaped vessel with a raised lip at one end and handle at the other, a bit like a gravy boat and the maid would be expected to carry this for her mistress and likewise empty it after use. If you didn’t have a maid then you dealt with this yourself. Apparently it was designed to be used standing up, possibly not that easy to use then!”

A 2013 article in The Daily Mail entitled “Did Mr. Darcy Have Bad Breath?” tells us something of Austen’s time period, “What of other toilet habits? Once again you needed stronger stomachs than we possess to get through the common daily atmosphere. Men, even women, caught short would use alleyways in which to relieve themselves.

Even indoors, it was common to keep a ‘jordan’ or chamber pot in the corner of public rooms. Privies, outside in the yard, were known as ‘necessaries’. There was no toilet paper on sale. They were supplied with household scrap paper, and even leaves and moss were pressed into service. Flush toilets which worked were introduced as late as 1778, by Joseph Bramah, but sewers were often not handy. Eventually, someone had to empty commodes and privies into buckets for collection by night soil men with carts. Arrangements in large towns were more sophisticated, but their streets were made noisome by the sheer weight of horse dung. This led to the need for crossing sweepers who would, for money, clear you a path to cross the street. It was hard to take a droppings-free walk in towns, hence the prevalence of foot scrapers at doorways. The rich, when not in carriages, employed sedan chairs carried by two chair men fore and aft.”

Bathroom etiquette is strange and interesting. Apparently ladies in the Georgian courts were not allowed to leave the royal presence unless dismissed, which could take a very long time. They wore cups strapped under their gowns so they could go while standing in place. It kind of explains those hooped skirts. Still, think how carefully you’d have to move so your cup did not, as they say, runneth over. 

Posted in Regency era | Tagged , , , | 6 Comments

Roger Ascham, Serving Four Monarchs

220px-roger_ascham_-_project_gutenberg_etext_12788 Born in Kirby Wiske (a village in the North Riding), Yorkshire, in 1515, Roger Ascham was the third son of John and Margaret Ascham. Ascham was the steward to Baron Scrope of Bolton. Roger Ascham was a scholar and didactic writer, famous for his prose style, his promotion of the vernacular, and his theories of education. In 1530, Ascham entered St. John’s College, Cambridge, where he studied Greek among other challenging subjects. He received his degree at the age of eighteen on 18 February 1534 and became a fellow of the college in March. At the age of twenty-one, Ascham became master of arts and began tutoring younger students. Ascham became reader in Greek around 1538 until Henry VII founded a lecture to take his place.

00ascham.jpg Ascham was educated at the house of Sir Humphrey Wingfield, a barrister, Ascham tells us, in the Toxophilus under a tutor named R. Bond. His preferred sport was archery, and Sir Humphrey “would at term times bring down from London both bows and shafts and go with them himself to see them shoot.”  In 1545 Ascham published the treatise Toxophilus or the Schole or Partitions of Shooting partly in defense of archery against those who found the sport unbefitting a scholar. The work was dedicated to Henry VIII, who enjoyed the treatise so much that he granted Ascham a pension: ten pounds a year. Ascham was further honored by being assigned to tutor Prince Edward.  

In 1548, after the death of Princess Elizabeth’s tutor, Ascham was appointed to the post of teaching the young woman who would become Queen Elizabeth I. He held the post until 1550 when he left the post without her consent. He was appointed secretary to Sir Richard Morisine and accompanied him to Germany later the same year. During his journey, Ascham wrote his Report and Discourse of the Affairs in Germany containing his impressions on the people and culture of Germany. Ascham also visited Italy, later recounting “the vices of Venice” in The Scholemaster.  Morisine was recalled to England at the death of Edward in 1553, and Ascham returned to Cambridge.

During Ascham’s absence he had been appointed Latin secretary to King Edward, a post he was instated in also under Queen Mary I. In 1554 Ascham married Margaret Howe. Upon Queen Mary’s death in 1558, he was appointed secretary to Queen Elizabeth, and in 1559 he was given the prebend of Westwang in Yorkshire.

aschamengraving2

Roger Ascham and Princess Elizabeth. Engraving by Michael Burghers, 17th-c. (via Luminarium)

In 1563 Ascham was invited by Sir Edward Sackville to write a treatise on education. This became The Scholemaster, published posthumously in 1570. Ascham took ill in 1568 with an unidentified disease and died at the age of fifty-three. Hearing of his death Queen Elizabeth is said to have exclaimed: “I would rather have cast ten thousand pounds in the sea than parted from my Ascham.” 

Ascham’s first published work, Toxophilus (“Lover of the Bow”) in 1545, was dedicated to Henry VIII.  “Toxophilus” is a Greek word meaning “the lover of archery.” It is a treatise on the sport of archery. The objects of the book were twofold, to commend the practice of shooting with the long bow, and to set the example of a higher style of composition than had yet been attempted in English. Ascham presented the book to Henry VIII at Greenwich  soon after his return from the capture of Boulogne. Toxophilus was the first book on archery in English. The work is a Platonic dialogue between Toxophilus and Philologus. Editions were published in 1571, 1589 and 1788, and by Edward Arber in 1868 and 1902.

Preface to Toxophilus tells us: To all Gentlemen and Yeomen of England. Croesus, the king famed for his riches, left the world an example: to give most regard to that at which nature has made us most apt. Thus, Englishmen should shoot with the long bow. This weapon should be used in peace as practise for war, and the author advocates that this is an honest and wholesome exercise, says the author. 

At this point, he digresses to discuss the superiority of the classic languages over the English; but he, he adds, that he will follow Aristotle’s counsel, and speak as the common people do. Now, he digresses again to discuss the old chivalric literature, declaring it to have been produced by a “blind kind of living” in the monasteries. Further, he apologizes for not being a perfect archer, but emphasizes that even if the practise is not perfect, one may preach. 

Book I of the piece has Ascham expressing the following ideas: (1) His pleasure that children are taught singing; (2) Even the Bible praises singing; (3) Singing is especially important to preachers and lawyers, for a fine voice moves the passions and singing helps the development of such a voice.

After that, Ascham returns to shooting. All English, he says, love shooting. The practise of shooting will draw young men away from vicious pastimes. It also prepares people for war. 

In Book II, Ascham describes winds – hot, cold; an up-and-down wind or a side wind. When he was traveling once over snow covered fields, the snow was blown in many directions. Thus, he came to know of its variability, which affects the shooting of men. 

In 1563 Ascham began the work The Scholemaster, published posthumously in 1570, which ensured his later reputation. Richard Sackville,  Ascham states in the book’s preface, told him that “a fond schoolmaster” had, by his brutality, made him hate learning, much to his loss, and as he had now a young son, whom he wished to be learned, he offered, if Ascham would name a tutor, to pay for the education of their respective sons under Ascham’s orders, and invited Ascham to write a treatise on “the right order of teaching.” The Scholemaster was the result.

As a former school teacher, I was most interesting in this piece. Book I of The Scholemaster claims a child should just learn grammar, but he should be taught cheerfully. In learning Latin, all should be carefully explained; rules should be learned by examples. Slow students should be treated sympathetically. Sometimes these prove to be the greater men whereas many a bright youth dies unheard of. “Hard wits be hard to receive, but sure to keep.” We should choose carefully those youngsters who are to be sent to the university. They should be sound in body and mind, should have good memories, love learning and labor, should be bold to ask questions. Then, at school, he should be taught “a good order of living” and discipline. 

Ascham goes on to explain that because of the deficiencies in the present methods of teaching, innocence and modesty were rare virtues. Nor can the English depend upon experience to teach a right way of living, for it is a costly way. “Learning teacheth more in one year than experience in twenty.”  He cautions those who live in court to be especially careful to live properly, for others shall imitate them. Then he warns that the young Englishman should be very careful not to follow the way of the Italians for the Italians are subtle and cunning and immoral. They often live in lechery and their religion is a sin. Ascham claims that England should remember that “an Englishman Italianate is the devil incarnate.” The essay closes as follows: “And thus far have I wandered from my first purpose of teaching a child, yet not altogether out of the way, because this whole talk hath tended to the only advancement of truth in religion and honesty of living….” 

There is some criticism of Ascham’s works, including the fact that much of his writing is inspired by the spirit of nationalism. What would ordinarily be a technical treatise, whether on shooting or on education, colored with Ascham’s ardent nationalistic sentiment, becomes a glowing piece of literature. He loved the long simile to draw comparisons, and drew upon nature frequently to fill out these comparisons. He also loved the epigrammatic manner of expression which give a homely quality to the writing of this man who was one of the greatest classical scholars of his are and whose works are full of classical allusions. It was natural for Ascham to fill his writing with Latin and Greek phraseology, but it must be said to his credit, that he explains fully to his reader whatever might be obscure. In general, he wrote with a high degree of clarity. 

Resources: 

“Ascham, Roger” in The New Encyclopedia Britannica. Chicago. 15th edn., 1992, Vol. 1, p. 617.

History of English Literature: Part I – Early Saxon through Milton. Hymarx Outline Series, Student Outlines Company. Boston, MA.

“Roger Ascham,” Luminarium

“Roger Ascham,” Spartacus Educational 

“Roger Ascham,” Wikipedia 

Posted in British history, drama, Elizabethan drama, history, legacy, literature, Tudors | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Learning to Be the “Lady of the Manor”

adam-buck-portrait-of-a-mother-and-her-daughter-in-white-dresses-the-daughter-with-a-skipping-rope.jpg Ladies in a country house were expected to practice the “correct” moral, social, and religious customs of the day. Not only were them women judged by these standards, but so were the rest of their family, especially if they acted from character. When Lydia Bennet elopes with George Wickham, she is considered a fallen woman, and by association her sisters were also considered of low morals. Such is the reason Darcy sets out to force a marriage between his old school chum and Elizabeth Bennet’s younger sisters. There would be those who criticized his marriage to Elizabeth because of her connections to trade, but the idea of marrying a woman who sister was of such low morals would not be easily overcome, even by a man of Darcy’s stature in Society. He cannot risk ruining his sister Georgiana’s Come Out by bringing a woman into her life who has relations of such low moral fiber. 

Young girls were trained from an early age to be the perfect Lady of the Manor. They often accompanied their mothers on house calls, church work, charity work, and tending to the cottagers upon the estate. They were expected to read religious tracts to encourage their intellect and charitable natures, but not to expand their thinking to issues of the day. Do you recall Miss Bingley’s description of an accomplished woman in Pride and Prejudice

“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.”

 

This “education” was not necessarily at the hands of their parents. First, the children had a nurse or a nanny and later a governess to instruct the young ladies in needlepoint, drawing, painting, music, etc. Nurses might have charge of the children of the house for long periods of time while the parents are away. The nurse would be responsible for not only the children’s instruction, but also at meals and playtime and on journeys to the park (while in London) or a family holiday to the seaside or the Peaks. The nurses brought the children down to “visit” with their parents at an appointed time each day.

Meals for the nursery and the schoolroom were prepared separately from the rest of the household. There was little variety in the children’s diets. We often read in our Regency novels of the gruel served over and over again to the children.  Throughout the day, children might be chicken, fish,  jellied soup, a milk or suet pudding, thinly sliced bread, butter, jam or preserves, etc. It was not unusual for the nursery to have its own china and silver and linens. 

2066127.jpg Facilities for the children were often quite sparse in comparison to the rest to the household. Girls’ toys were dolls and doll houses, perhaps a rocking horse or a small ball. Pamela Horn in Ladies of the Manor (page 32) tells us, “The clothing worn by well-to-do children for much of the Victorian and Edwardian period was cumbersome and uncomfortable. Little girls wore numerous petticoats – flannel in winter and stiffly starched cotton in summer. For outdoor excursions there were black-buttoned boots, ornate hats, and coats of pelisses, embellished with tucks, frills or pleats. There was also a large amount of ‘dressing up’ to cope with. According to Sarah Sedgwick, who was a nanny in several large households, winter clothing were retained, irrespective of the temperature, until late September. In winter, girls wore a vest, ‘a woollen binder, drawers, a bodice, a flannel petticoat and on top flannel dresses.’ Summer saw the flannel petticoat exchanged for one of lighter weight, ‘the binder was cotton instead of wool, and the frocks cotton, linen or muslin.’ The same clothes were never worn both morning and afternoon and a further complete change was required before the youngsters went downstairs for the ‘children’s hour.'”

 

Posted in British history, Georgian England, Georgian Era, Living in the Regency, Living in the UK, Regency era, Victorian era | Tagged , , , , | 5 Comments

Happy February Birthdays to Some of Our Favorite “Austen” Actors

party-clip-art-balloons-different-coloursThese fabulous Thespians have brought us hours of viewing fun in Austen-inspired films. Happy Birthday

 

 

 

2550-ciaranhinds1bMichael-Amini_Jane-Seymour9 FebruaryCiarán Hinds, who portrayed Captain Frederick Wentworth in 1995’s Persuasion

15 FebruaryJane Seymour, who portrayed Mrs Wattlesbrook in Austenland

 

80795cf07e9cf5158827991a453ed48ffac2d4a2MV5BMTYzOTQzMDM4OF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwOTcxNzgwNA@@._V1_UX214_CR0,0,214,317_AL_17 FebruaryBenjamin Whitrow, who portrayed Mr Bennet in 1995’s Pride and Prejudice

18 FebruaryGreta Scacchi, who portrayed Cassandra Austen in Miss Austen Regrets

 

MV5BMTI3NDQ3NTMwNF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTYwMzY4NjEz._V1_SX640_SY720_brenda-blethyn420 FebruaryAnthony Head, who portrayed Sir Walter Elliot in 2007’s Persuasion 

20 FebruaryBrenda Blethyn, who portrayed Mrs Bennet in 2005’s Pride and Prejudice 

 

images21 FebruaryAlan Rickman, who po469900_1rtrayed Colonel Brandon in 1995’s Sense and Sensibility (21 February 1946 – 14 January 2016)

22 FebruaryJulie Walters, who portrayed Mrs Austen in Becoming Jane

 

441079-downton-abbey-robert-bathurst-sir-anthony-strallan22 FebruaryRobert Bathurst, who porUFzuW-tbtrayed Mr Weston in 2009’s Emma

23 FebruaryTamsin Greig, who portrayed Miss Bates in 2009’s Emma

 

 

john_carson_2011_3

25 FebruaryDouglas Hodge, who portrayed Sir Thomas Bertram in 2007’s Mansfield Park

url                                          28 February John Carson, who portrayed Mr Knightley in 1972’s Emma 

Posted in film adaptations, Great Britain, Jane Austen, real life tales | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

The Lovely World of the English Language ~ Do You Know These Idioms?

Unknown Are you like me? Do you wonder from where a particular phrase originates? I am often in a position to search out a phrase or a word to determine whether it is too modern for my writings set in the Regency Period of British History. I once had an editor who changed my sentence from “He donned his cloak and beaver” to “He donned his cloak with the beaver lining.” For those of you reading this who are not aware, a “beaver” was a type of hat worn by gentlemen of the Regency period.

So, what are some of you favorite phrases? These are ones which have always brought forth my curiosity…

“Crying Uncle”
Being from West Virginia, colloquialisms abound in my language. The boys would often taunt each other to cry “uncle” or even to cry “cavey.” The “uncle” part could be traced to the Latin phrase, Patrue mi patruissinme, which means “Uncle, my best of uncles!” – a fair cry for someone crying quits in a matter of wills. Meanwhile “cavey” is a corrupted contraction of peccavi, meaning “I am at fault.”

notes2p6.JPG “Whipping Boy”
We know this phrase lies in the use of a scapegoat for an inflicted punishment. Some five hundred years prior, a royal prince was considered sacred; therefore, no governess or tutor would dare to strike the child. In the early 1600s in England, a “whipping boy” was presented with the punishment meant for the prince. The son of James I (who was to become Charles I) was the first reportedly to be given the reprieve of a punishment at the expense of a lad known as William Murray, his fellow pupil.

“On Tick”
This was originally a form of an IOU. “On Ticket” was a form of note of hand, a written notice of indebtedness. The contracted “On Tick” came into use in the early 17th Century. The Oxford English Dictionary cites the phrase first coming into use in 1642, but we know such words and phrases are likely around for 20 years or more before they show up in a dictionary.

“High Jinks”
This phrase was first used by Sir Walter Scott in Guy Mannering: “[t]he frolicsome company had begun to practicse the ancient and now forgotten pastime of High Jinks.”

“On the Carpet”
Originally “on the carpet” referred to something “on the table,” meaning something to discuss. However, in the early 18th Century, the mistress of the house placed the table coverings upon the floors of their bedchambers. Later, a servant might “walk the carpet,” meaning he/she was called before his/her master or mistress for a reprimand. We in America have transformed the phrase to “on the carpet.”

not_worth_a_hill_of_beans_tshirt.jpg “Not Worth a Hill of Beans”
This is one of the oldest phrases common to our language. Robert of Gloucester used it in his English Chronicles of 1297:
Be king of alimayne sende specialliche inou
To king Ion bat he wipdrowe him of is wou
& vnderuenge be erchebissop holichurche al clene
Lete abbe ir franchise & al nas wurp a bene.
{The king of Almain sent especially to king John to forget his hurt, and receive the archbishop, and let Holy Church have her franchise, clear and clean; although not worth a bean.}
Americans inserted the “Hill” to the phrase during the later part of the 1800s. It added an exaggerated emphasis, a characteristic common to Americanisms.

GOP-Spite-Your-Face.jpg “Cutting Off One’s Nose to Spite His Face”
This one likely stems from a French 17th Century phrase. In the 1658 Historiettes of Gédéon Tallemant des Réaux, one finds “Henri iv conçut fot bien que détruire Paris, c’étoit, comme on dit, se couper le nez pour faire dépit à son visage.” Essentially, this says Henry IV would know destroying Paris would be as foolish as cutting off his own nose. The French phrase made its way to England by the end of the 18th Century and was recorded in Grose’s A Classical Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue” (1796).

“Alpha and Omega”
Needless to say, these are the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet, and the meaning comes from that particular fact, but did you know that “alpha” and “omega” are found in the Bible in the “The Revelation of St. John the Divine”? The phrase is repeated four times: in both the 8th and the 11th verses of chapter one; in the 6th verse of chapter 21; and in the 13th verse of chapter 22.

“Jitney”
This term became popular in the early 1900s in the United States as a slang term for a nickel. The term was transferred to the passenger vehicle (except for a streetcar) which required a five-cent fare. Dr. F. H. Vizetelly suggests the word might be a corruption of jetnée in a catch song of the French-speaking Louisiana Negro:

Mettons jetnée dans li trou
Et parcourons sur la rue –
Mettons jetnée – si non vous
Vous promenez à pied nu!
(Translation: Put a jitney in the slot; And over the street you ride; Put a jitney – for it not; You’ll foot it on your hide.)

“Fortnight” or “Sennight”
The Anglo-Saxons who had conquered Britain in the 5th and 6th centuries did not accept the idea of seven days = one week. Instead, they clung to the traditional phrasing of calling a week “seven nights.” Their term became seofon nihta in Old English, which was eventually corrupted into the term sennight. For those of us who write Regency pieces, a “sennight” is 7 days. Austen uses the word when Mr. Collins assures Mr. Darcy that Lady Catherine was well when he had last seen her a “sennight” past. “Fortnight” comes from the Old English feowertene nihta, meaning 14 nights – eventually contracted into “fortnight.”

“Milliner”
In the early 16th Century Milan traders flocked to English ports, bringing with them products from Milan and from Lombardy – chief among them textile goods such as Milan gloves and lace and ribbons, as well as steel work. At the time, the English pronounced “Milan” as if the city’s name rhymed with “villain.” Therefore, Milan merchants became “Milaners,” which was pronounced as if it were “milliners.” Thus, “Milliner” became the accepted spelling. The use of “millinery” to refer to women’s headgear came about in the years which followed.

So, tell me some of your favorites. Are there those we should search out together? Perhaps, I should make this a regular feature on my blog. It was certainly fun to organize.

Posted in word origins, word play | Tagged , , , | 18 Comments