Back to Top

Category: Research

Posts in which we talk about research

IMG_0024
I arrived home yesterday at about 9:30 pm, which was like 2:30 am in the UK, so I am a little tired today but already missing England. There were so many wonderful experiences on this trip, it is hard to pick out one to share today.

Since this was The Duke of Wellington tour, most of the sites we visited related to the Duke. One I knew little about was Walmer Castle.

IMG_0023The Duke of Wellington was appointed Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports, a post he held for 23 years. The Cinque Ports are five ports on the English Channel that were originally formed for military and trade purposes, but is now entirely ceremonial. Henry VIII built Walmer Castle as a defense against possible invasion.

Wellington spent part of each year at Walmer Castle. One of the reasons he liked it so well was that it was enough distant from London that he was not inundated by visitors. One notable visitor, though, was Queen Victoria who came with Prince Albert and their two oldest children.

IMG_0022We saw Wellington’s bed chamber at Walmer. There was a writing desk under a window where Wellington wrote letters early in the morning, looking out at the sea as he did so. Wellington wrote letters standing up and the desk looked somewhat like a lectern.  In that room was his camp bed where he preferred to sleep and also the arm chair where he suffered his fatal stroke.

Wellington used to walk every day and he was a favorite with the local children. He’d keep a number of sovereigns each suspended from a red or a blue ribbon. He’d ask the children if they were for the navy or the army. Navy received blue ribbons and army received red ones.

IMG_0021The gardens of Walmer, now beautiful, were reputed to be a shambles during Wellington’s tenure. He’d hired a gardner with no knowledge or experience in gardening. One day in London a Sergeant Townsend wrote to the Duke to complain of being discharged from the army without a pension. Wellington gave him the job of gardener at Walmer.

The gardens are beautiful today.

Two other notable Lords of the Cinque Ports were Sir Winston Churchill and the Queen Mother.

More later!

Private Theatre at Brandenburg House, Fulham

Private Theatre at Brandenburg House, Fulham

Private theatricals were all the rage during the late 18th century/ early 19th century. I have always had a hankering to write a story that takes place during a theatrical production at a house party. As Jane Austen recognized in Mansfield Park, this can lead to all sorts of interesting interactions.

From about 1770 genteel British society was affected by the urge to perform plays in private theatres.

And they had to be “private” and amateur; unlicensed public performances were illegal .The Licensing Act of 1737 stipulated a fine of £50 for anyone convicted of acting for “hire, gain or reward” in any play or theatrical performance not previously allowed by royal patent or Licensed by the Lord Chamberlain.

Program for private theatrical at Horace Walpole's Strawberry Hill

Program for private theatrical at Horace Walpole’s Strawberry Hill

Marc Baer in his excellent book, Theatre and Disorder in Late Georgian London, theorizes that private may have been preferable to many of the upper classes who wished to avoid the riots which were so prevalent a part of theatre going, in the 18th century.

Also that it was a step by the upper classes to distance themselves from the increasingly plebeian nature of performances at the two Patent theatres in London. They were once concerned only with productions of “serious” plays and opera, but were increasingly incorporating elements of pantomine, and melodrama, burletta and pure spectacle into the evening’s entertainment. In short the evenings were becoming vulgar.

“It was beyond everything vulgar I ever saw…the people were hollowing and talking to each other from the pit to the gallery, and fighting and throwing oranges at each other. The play itself was a representation of all the low scenes in London… a sort of very low Beggar’s Opera, but it is impossible to describe the sort of enthusiasm with which it was received by the people who seems to enjoy a representation of scenes, in which, from their appearance, one might infer they frequently shared.”

(extract from a letter written by Mrs Harriet Arbuthnot, writing about seeing a performance of Life in London by Pierce Egan and George Cruickshank at the Adelphi Theatre in 1822.)

Some of the more prosperous amateur performers constructed very elaborate private theatres- some were decidedly amateur.

Paula Byrne writes in her book Jane Austen and the Theatre remarks;

Makeshift theatre mushroomed all over England from drawing room to domestic buildings. At the more extreme end of the theatrical craze member of the gentrified classes and the aristocracy built their own scaled down imitations of London playhouses. The most famous was that erected in the late 1770s by the spendthrift Earl of Barrymore, at a reputed cost of £60,000.

Barrymore’s elaborate private theatre was modelled on Vanburghs Kings Theatre in the Haymarket. It supposedly seated seven hundred

We know from records of the very elaborate and private theatricals at Richmond House- home to the Duke of Richmond (and his daughters, the Lennox sister, subjects of Stella Tillyard’s book Aristocrats) that these private theatricals could be very professional indeed.

This craze for theatricals was reflected in the literature of the time. Jane Austen was not the only author who used the craze in her work. Amanda Vickery in her book The Gentleman’s Daughter remarks;

The donning of disguise and the doffing of decorum might be thrilling for participants but it could be disquieting to attentive observers, as novels such as Jane Austen’s Mansfield Park (1814) Maria Edgeworth’s Patronage (1814) and Fanny Burney’s The Wanderer (1814) dramatically demonstrated.

In a note to this part of her text she adds;

The narrative possibilities inherent in amateur performance were seized on by novelists, but assessments of the morality of female exhibition differed. Fanny Price piously refuses to take part in Lovers Vows, which redounds to her credit…The pure and perfect Caroline Percy declines an invitation to take part in Zara, which in the event demonstrates the vanity of her rival, yet Caroline remains a sympathetic member of the audience…On the other hand, the “incognita” is allowed to give a dignified performance as Lady Townley in The Provoked Husband, which convinces many in the audience of her gentility:

Opinions as to the desirability and correctness of “polite” females appearing on the stage certainly varied as evidenced from these novels. A position certainly reflected by Jane Austen in Mansfield Park.

Certainly, members of the growing Evangelical Movement in the Church of England voiced grave concerns about such performances.

In his work An Enquiry into the Duties of the Female Sex (1797),  Reverend Thomas Gisbourne took a stance very much against this type of theatrical performance. Actresses were still not quite “respectable” at this time in history, despite the success of actresses such as Mrs Siddons, who was a favourite with King George III and Queen Charlotte.

For some years past the custom of acting in plays in private theatres, fitted up by individuals of fortune, had occasionally prevailed. It is a custom liable to objection among others: that it is almost certain to prove, in its effects, injurious to the female performers. Let it be admitted that theatres of this description no longer present the flagrant impropriety of ladies bearing apart in the drama in conjunction with professional players. Let it be admitted, that the drama reflected will in its language and conduct always be reprehensible.  Let it even be admitted, that many theatrical talents will not hereafter gain admission upon such a Stage for men of ambiguous or worse than ambiguous character. Take the benefit of all these favourable circumstances; yet what is even then the tendency of such an amusement? To encourage vanity; to excite a thirst of applause and admiration of attainments which, if the are to be thus exhibited, it would commonly have been far better for the individual not to possess; to destroy diffidence, by the unrestrained familiarity with the persons of the other sex, which inevitably results from being joined with them in the drama; to create a general fondness for the perusal of plays, of which so many are unfit to be read; and for attending dramatic representations, of which so many are unfit to be witnessed.

Jane Austen read this work, on Cassandra’s recommendation, in 1805. She had expected to dislike it, but surprised herself by approving of it.

Something broke in our infrastructure here a couple of days ago and the area where I live is now under a boil water alert. We have to boil any water we intend to use for cooking, handwashing dishes, drinking, or cleaning teeth (I’ve forgotten already a couple of times) for one minute, or use bottled water. It’s an annoyance but not impossible. No ice, though, unless I hunt down some ice trays, which I think I got rid of some time ago.

I can’t even compare it with Georgian London, which was a horrendously dirty city.

If I would drink water, I must quaff the mawkish contents of an open aqueduct, exposed to all manner of defilement, or swallow that which comes from the River Thames, impregnated with all the filth of London and Westminster.
Tobias Smollet, 1771.

water-seller cries After the hasty and inadequate rebuilding of London in the previous century following the Great Fire, the city grew and grew. The water available became undrinkable. The wealthy could afford to buy spring water from street sellers. For everyone else, gin was a cheap substitute that would quench both thirst and misery. It’s said that the widespread availability of tea in the mid nineteenth century saved lives, since water had to be boiled.

watersellerEven by the end of the nineteenth century London water was suspect. Here’s a water seller from 1900 in Cheapside.

It’s ironic when you consider that London was once a city of many rivers, some lost, and some like the River Fleet, now completely underground. fleet river st p 1825It went from being a healthy spring, making the suburb of Hampstead something of a spa resort, to an open sewer, to a river that is now almost completely invisible. But this print of the Fleet in the area of St. Pancras in 1825 shows how comparatively rural London was at this time, before the huge expansion of the Victorian age. If you want to know more, there’s a book which promises hours of fun, London’s Lost Rivers by Paul Talling. If you visit his website, londonslostrivers.com, there’s a fascinating slideshow of photographs. More about the Fleet here.

Some other links:

London’s lost rivers: the hidden history of the city’s buried waterways

Secret London: Lost Rivers

In search of London’s lost rivers

and the London rivers action plan to restore the rivers.

There are walking tours of the lost rivers (and of the London sewers should you be so inclined. I wonder if Risky Diane has that on her itinerary?) Yet another thing to do in London. Is there something out of the ordinary you’d like to do or visit in London?

I’ve finished my manuscript and am knee-deep in second draft territory, so I’m going to take an easy route today and share some of my favorite links on the Georgian and Regency eras.

Sarah Siddons by Joshua Reynolds

Sarah Siddons by Joshua Reynolds

What Jane Saw – On 24 May 1813, Jane Austen visited an art exhibit at the British Institution in Pall Mall, London. The popular show was the first-ever retrospective of the works of Sir Joshua Reynolds (1723-1792), England’s celebrated portrait painter. Two centuries later, this e-gallery offers the modern visitor a historical reconstruction of that long-lost Regency blockbuster.

The Kyoto Costume Institute – Justifiably famous for its staggering collection of European costumes, the page representing the 18th early 19th century are totally awe-inspiring.

nelson-exhibit

Nelson Exhibit at National Maritime Museum

The National Maritime Museum – Wonderful searchable site for British naval history.

Dictionary of the English Language – 1822 edition of Samuel Johnson’s dictionary at Google Books.

British Titles of Nobility – Laura Wallace’s excellent introduction and primer to the peerage.

ICES

Georgian Ices

Historic Food – Ivan Day is “the” historical food expert”. This site is fascinating,replete with recipes,fabulous illustrations and tempting details of his courses.

I’m sure some of these are familiar to you. I hope some of them are nice surprises.  And I’d love to hear about your favorite web sites on our period.

I found an intriguing article on the Historic Royal Palaces blog, The Making of the Modern Bra.

We know that women made little home-made linen or cotton bodices to lift and define their breasts for the new-style dresses. There was no elastic and no underwiring as yet, so these women cut and shaped the fabrics they had to hand, and used lacing to pull the fabric in for extra hold … for a brief time, at the turn of the 19th century, there was a little golden age of home-made undergarments that can claim to being the first British bras as we know them today.

The article claims that staymakers were caught by surprise  at the fashion revolution of the 1790s when the line, fit, and even the fabrics of gowns took a radical turn. Thus women took it upon themselves to cobble together undergarments that would work–essentially what New York socialite Mary Phelphs Jacobson did in 1913 when she needed something to wear under a (somewhat?) transparent evening gown. She used handkerchiefs, lace and cord, and patented the item a year later. I have to admit that bra research gets a bit murky as someone named Marie Tucek patented her “breast supporter” in 1893.

So the questions of the day:

  1. Did late Georgian staymakers have to scramble to catch up with fashions, and
  2. where are the extant early handmade “bras”?
Fr Stay maker

A dedicated French staymaker hard at work.

To the first question, I say no. I don’t think they did. Any smart staymaker would have been keeping his/her eye on what was going on with les francais. I did a search on the Bath Chronicle archives (1770-1800), which are part of the astonishing Bath Archives, a fantastic timesuck research source. I searched on staymakers and found that business seemed to be booming, if not downright cutthroat in July of 1792:

13 Aug 1789 Fashion: Mr F Albrecht, French staymaker, 12 Miles Court, just returned from London with newest fashions of stays, corsets & riding stays.

26 Jul 1792 Employment: 8 journeyman staymakers required by a Master of Bath, London wages offered. Wm Driver, French staymaker, Trim Gate, Borough Walls

5 Jul 1792 Fashion: 8 journeyman staymakers wanted immediately, London wages, apply to several Masters in Bath. Will be protected from molestation & obstruction by previous employees. Fra. Allwright, French staymaker, Green St, Bath

19 Jul 1792 Employment: journeyman staymakers wanted – by several Masters in Bath, London wages. They will prosecute those inclined to obstruct those inclined to serve. H Tanton, French staymaker, 1 Quiet St on behalf of the Masters. Also apprentice wanted.

26 Jul 1798 Fashion: Francis Troei, staymaker (successor to Mr Loons) 18 Union Psge [Bath] has newest fashions in stays, corsets and new invented corset “la garlisle”. Orders Mr Philpot, perfumer, Bristol or Mrs Philpot, Hotwells

21 Nov 1799 Fashion: Geo Sykes, staymaker of 10 Abingdon Bldgs, Northampton St, Bath has the newest fashions executed to satisfaction. Good home-made stays for servants & working women 1 guin/pr. Sykes also carries on an umbrella manufactory

I included that last one because I thought it was interesting that the enterprising Mr. Sykes branched out into umbrellas, a natural expansion with whalebone and canvas to hand, and that he was making ready-made stays for working women. In another ad in the previous year he warned patrons that his 1-guinea stays were available for “ready money only.”

So calling costume historians. Should our heroines sit at home embroidering their own brassieres? Maybe they did; there’s a reference in a short story by Mrs. Gaskell that claims it was fashionable to make your own shoes at the turn of the century too, but I’ve never found it referenced elsewhere (but then I’ve never really looked). And unless staymakers included some sort of identifying label or mark, and the genteel amateurs embroidered their initials into their garments, how would we tell?

And what is a corset “la garlisle?”