Have spent the evening looking up various things: the Currie family, the doll house of Bertram Wodehouse Currie’s boys (more on that later!), the Seymours of Kinwarton, and always trying to find something new on the Goslings…

I keep looking for new pictures – remembering some early photographs of GROVE HOUSE that Roehampton University used to have online and are now long gone. (Makes you learn to SAVE pictures to your hard drive!) I found these, which put me quite ‘in the picture’.

Visiting The Vyne (in Hampshire), I could imagine Eliza Gosling (Mary’s mother) arm-in-arm with Eliza Chute, or my two girls — Mary and Emma — running up the stairs. But Roehampton Grove was Mary’s home – she went there when she was ill in the months before her death; her girlhood diaries always have the family leaving on trips from Roehampton, for this is how I first met her: “We left Roehampton on Monday the 27th of August, at eleven o’clock our party consisting of Papa, Mamma, my Sister, and myself: we went with our own horses to Salt hill, a distance of 19 miles.” 

<<< Mary seems especially alive in such an evocative setting

And surely this was the domain of William, her father >>>

There is a Wedding ’show’ being held at the estate on 22 November 2009 – oh, to be able to go there! It’s free! If anyone goes and has eyes for something OTHER than wedding bits and pieces, do tell me about it (or better yet send pictures!).

For the *few* who might be interested: I enclose here my proposal for the next Annual General Meeting of JASNA. Never thought to stress the *mayhem* of a young girl’s first “season”…

Augusta deserves to have her tale told, but I’m not holding my breath that it gets accepted. (AGM2010_McDonald)

Having attended the Annual General Meeting (AGM) of the Jane Austen Society of North America (JASNA) last weekend, Thursday through Sunday, I came home with some fresh perspectives on Austen, a few new acquaintances, and a bag of books!

One of those I have been enjoying on this grey-with-sunny-intervals Saturday morning: Jane Austen’s Brother Abroad: The Grand Tour Journals of Edward Austen, edited by Jon Spence. Thanks to the AGM ’boutique’, Austen Books appeared as a vendor – and offered many books I knew of but was always too lazy to mail order (all that additional cost). That goes doubly for this book, which was published by JASA – the Jane Austen Society of Australia.

There was an excerpt online, but JASA’s website seems to be having some problems: I can’t manage to get off their homepage!

Few who study Jane Austen solely for herself or her novels will be intrigued about this slim volume; but those with an interest in diaries — especially travel diaries, will be enchanted by the pictures drawn of two parts of a grand Grand Tour; Edward Austen Knight spent nearly four years on the Continent! One journal is owned by the Hampshire Record Office; the other by Yale University. I will have more to say of this book at a later date — and maybe by then I can find or scan a copy of the cover.

[next day] Scanned in this lovely cover and here it is…

by Frenchie (Photobucket)

On this date – 27 September – in 1801, Emma Smith was born.

Unlike Mary Gosling (who mentions only the birthdays of her children; never Charles’ or her own), Emma’s diaries make running comments on the birthdays of her mother and all her siblings. She also comments upon her own ‘natal day’, in both her diaries and her letters. I especially like these, written in 1821:

from the diary, 27 Sept - “God grant I may grown in virtue as in years”

and from a letter to Aunt Judith Smith, dated 28 Sept – “It is quite alarming to think I have completed a score of years & left my teens entirely, I shall fancy I begin to feel old”.

She continues, by listing a series of gifts given her: “–Augusta made me present of an ivory opera glass  Fanny a pretty blue bead necklace she has strung. Eliza a most excellent pen knife, Charlotte a little satin pincushion, & Maria a silk mark for a book made on the bobbin machine.”

Over the Labor Day weekend, I visited one of my favorite used bookstores: Old Depot No. 6, in Henniker, New Hampshire. As usual, I spent most of my time upstairs, amid the British history and biography section of this very well-laid-out store. Among the ‘finds’ volumes one and two of the Torrington Diaries; I already had volume one, but was missing volume two thanks to an online store “selling, misplacing, losing, etc” the volume they had posted for sale. They were library copies, the first volume a bit worse for wear; but the price was one I would have paid for a single volume, never mind the two. I also got a dual biography of Wellington and the Arbuthnots; I have the Journals of Mrs Arbuthnot and was intrigued to see what someone researching to three had to say.

Then, standing at the register, I happened to spy a tiny little book entitled “Victorian Horses and Carriages” – which featured quaint and cute drawings done by William Francis Freelove. A precious find, indeed!

There are some really funny little works; and I searched to find the entire set of drawings from the series – finally succeeding in coming across them in the Bridgeman Collection. Two of my favorites: the little poem which closes this copy of the drawings (at left),

Up hill urge me not,
Down hill hurry me not,
Along the level spare me not,
And in the stable forget me not.

How very apropos!

And one of my favorite drawings, not found in this little sampling of Freelove’s drawings, is one called Wedding Carriages. What an absolutely charming display of horses, happiness, carriges and church. This one especially speaks to me because of the article I am currently writing (for submission one last time to Persuasions, the Jane Austen Journal): “Pemberley’s Welcome” looks at Elizabeth Darcy’s arrival at Pemberley, based on the diary entry Emma Smith wrote about a similar ‘welcome home’ to the bridge of Emma’s cousin Lord Compton in 1815.

The following weekend after this ‘find’, I was speaking on “Georgiana Darcy and the ‘Naïve Art’ of Young Ladies”, at Hyde Park (see the Austen weekends at the Governor’s House). By the way, I must say this particular explaination of ‘naïve art’ is excellent: “Term applied to the work of non-professional artists who apply themselves to their art in a resolute and independent spirit.” (paraphrased from this website.) Anyway, in August one picture by young artist Mary Yelloly sparks a conversation about carriages – so, of course, I had to bring this little volume of Freelove’s with me to share with this new group.

At the same time, talking with Suzanne, the B&B’s owner, Sunday – with plans to offer talks on carriages or fashion when the topic of her weekends turn to Sense and Sensibility – I came up with a wonderful idea for a new article! As my Hyde Park talk centered on the minor character of Georgiana Darcy, this article will focus on the character of young Margaret Dashwood. Can’t wait to get started – and will share more about it later, once it finds a home!

After a bit of a search, a dear friend in Britain has come across one of the British Library’s Austen items – the Jane Austen Desk Diary — and our two figures have been identified!

The disappointing part is that, while profusely illustrated (with silhouettes by JEAL [James Edward Austen Leigh] as well as BL illustrations), there are no other people-silhouettes in the book [mentally insert a sad face here...].  See my previous post for some theories and hypotheses.

So who, according to my dickie bird, are these people?? The man – who I thought just might be Edward Austen Knight (Jane’s brother who was ‘adopted’ when a youth) – turns out to be James Edward Austen-Leigh! From the pictures I have of him – a couple paintings and one photograph taken in old age, I simply would not have guessed it was him.

And the girl I had so hoped was Emma’s sister Fanny?? Seems this is a silhouette of Caroline Wiggett, the adopted daughter of the Chutes of The Vyne! I kept thinking ‘no way!’ all day – but looking at my cache of pics just now I see that the silhouette I recalled in my mind’s eye and thought was a young Caroline Wiggett is actually of Caroline Austen (JEAL’s sister). No wonder they look nothing alike!

So mystery solved, as far as published pictures of the family goes. What the Austen-Leighs of today may have in their possession (and which may have been thought not as interesting as the silhouettes Edward cut for his children) remains to be seen (literally and figuratively). Evidently the British Library did not try to attribute the silhouettes to anyone. Could they possibly be the work of Emma’s eldest sister, Augusta?? I would LOVE to think that!

In Emma’s diaries there are MANY mentions of Augusta’s ’shades’; she evidently was quite the adept at producing good likenesses. From Caroline’s “Reminiscences” (not published, but available in manuscript copy at the Hampshire Record Office), Augusta and Caroline were fast friends. Nice to believe, therefore, that the threesome were occupied one quiet evening, perhaps while everyone visited The Vyne, in creating what has come down to us via this lovely cover art.

Kerri Spennicchia — who supplies us all with dozens of Austen clippings — sent the following Times Literary Supplement review (TLS) of Hazel Jones’ recent Austen book.

I wish you could read it — but something’s up with WordPress — the file uploads, but doesn’t link. Will try again later.

[9/11] It’s now later and for some reason it still doesn’t ‘pop’ in – but I did a bit of finagling and *finally* it works - be advised, however, that you will have to turn the page image around: it opens upside-down! [no real big deal, Kerri...]

In the meantime, with all the problems, I checked out the publisher’s listing of reviews (hoping for a link to the TLS): Continuum includes an excerpt from my review found on the JASNA-Vermont chapter blog!

Sooo…. looking for more of my own work (!! = but, if I don’t toot my own horn, no one else will), I found a website by historian and author John Styles – whose book The Dress of the People I reviewed in the most recent JASNA-News. He has some interesting research avenues, including a history of hand spinning in England. Check out his website.

October update: the JASNA review can now be found online.

Actually, there are TWO mentions of Richard Seymour — in online books. One – The Rambler in Worcestershire – has noted Richard in his clergyman capacity at Kinwarton; the other – Art and Nature Under an Italian Sky – lists not only Richard but Fanny Seymour as subscribers.

Other names on the pages with connections to those in this blog:

Sir William Knighton, bart.
Dowager Lady Knighton
Miss Hawker
Mrs G. Wilder
Rev. Sir J. H. C. Seymour, bart. [Maria's husband]
Mrs Arthur Currie [Dora, Arthur's second wife]
Mrs Spencer Smith

Given the number of Seymour relations, one must ask: who was the author, M.J.M.D.??? The book was published by Constable in Edinburgh, in 1852. The site, archive.org, names the author Margaret Juliana Maria Dunbar.

I am reading (a library copy) Katherine Sutherland’s Jane Austen’s Textual Lives. She has much to say about the Austen-Leigh Memoir with which _I_ would disagree, but I want to comment on the “Cassandra Controversy” Sutherland and everyone writing on Austen sooner or later bring up. Why is it, I ask myself this morning, everyone cares ONLY for the letters of Jane written to Cassandra?? Is it because we know they once existed? Does the imagined ‘bonfire’ ignite the passion for the “lost letters”?? (They were Cassandra’s property to do with as she pleased…) My indignation (rather too strong a word, but I will use it) comes from the fact that no one cares – or at least writes about – the lost letters of CASSANDRA! If Jane wrote to her, she wrote to Jane. They existed, though are a bit more ephemeral from the perspective of not being divvied up, not being knowingly burned, not being by the famous sister.

Jane Austen did not live in a vacuum. My own researches into the letters of the Smith family prove that each member of a family wrote — in turn — to other members of the family. Therefore, not only would there have been Jane’s letters to the likes of cousins like Eliza, Jane would have written her mother, her father, her brothers, her friends (Martha Llloyd, the Bigg sisters); and oh! what ever happened to the letters to Miss Sharp.

Cassandra, too, would have had a circle of correspondents. Never mind the brothers, with their wide circles of acquaintance.

The volume of family letters known as the Austen Papers, which I make no bones about saying “collate ALL the known Austen letters, Jane’s and her family’s, into a volume” are easily dismissed by Austen scholars: They should not be! That would be like presenting Mozart’s letters without those of his father.

An interesting point, to get back to the “circle” of correspondents a singular writer would have had: Emma writes to one of her sisters a letter already addressed to another sister! The opening line apologizes, claiming that although the letter was written to one it is “by rights” the turn of this sister, whose name was inserted near the crossed out name of the original recipient. Did the sister mind? Evidently not! Did the sister desire a letter, any letter, rather than that it went to the original sister? – Evidently! That was of more importance than the crossing out and substitution! After all, most letters were read aloud. (I have only come across ONE letter, one written by Mary Smith, in which the writer designated the letter ‘private’ = which therefore would NOT have been read out or passed around to other readers.)

There is much, in this age of phone calls and emails, that people do not think about concerning the age of letter-writing. I sincerely wish the laments for the “lost” Austen letters extended to the “lost” letters that were either also later destroyed (the niece’s destruction of letters to her father comes to mind), but also perhaps were never kept.

There has long been the question in the back of my mind as regards keeping correspondence. This came up when reading about Mozart’s many, many moves in the years of his marriage: All those letters from Papa Mozart were hauled from house to house to house. Imagine the *desire* to keep such items!!

Through this blog, I have met several people who have some snippet of surviving family correspondence. How lucky they are! All I have of my family are a handful of sepia photographs – which I treasure, I must confess, because of the rarity of their survival.

In short, we should be grateful for what we have, and stop harping on what was lost (through whatever means: destruction, carelessness, or cutting up for souvenirs). I am, for the Smith letters, even while I hope there is more to uncover!

As Emma notes (and Annual Register published), the birth of Mary’s son Charles – born 15 September 1827 – took place at 32 New Norfolk Street (London):

Imagine my surprise last night in learning that this was (1) the home of Grandmamma, Lady Cunliffe; and (2) the building still exists (more or less…)! The Survey of London, vol. 40 (British History Online) in its survey of The Grosvenor Estate in Mayfair has the following to say about the area and the building; photographs come from the same source:
 
PARK LANE

“Today, looking over the wide dual carriageway of Park Lane with Hyde Park stretching beyond, it is difficult to imagine that this road was once a narrow, rutted and unlit track alongside a high brick wall which screened it from the park. In 1741 Tyburn Lane (as it was then known) was one of a number of roads taken over by the Kensington Turnpike Trust…. A short terrace of houses—King’s Row on the site of the present Nos. 93–99 (consec.) Park Lane—was built there in the 1720’s and 1730’s, but it was set back from the roadway behind a small plantation, and few other houses were erected directly along its remaining frontage. When Norfolk (now Dunraven) Street was laid out in the 1750’s the houses on the west side turned their backs to Park Lane, a circumstance that eventually led to much picturesque modification of these rear elevations….”

{the ‘rear’ view of houses provides this photos unusual juxtaposition of buildings}

caption to plate 73b: Nos. 117 (formerly 37) Park Lane (right) and 128 park Lane (left) with backs of Nos. 25-31 Dunraven Street between (left to right) in July 1926. (note: Nos. 25-31 demolished.)

DUNRAVEN STREET

“Originally called Norfolk Street, it was sometimes known as New Norfolk Street in the nineteenth century and was renamed Dunraven Street by the London County Council in 1939 after the fourth Earl of Dunraven and Mount-Earl, a former resident of the street….”

And specifically, for our purposes here:

“No. 117.

This house, originally No. 32 Norfolk Street, and from 1872 to 1934 known as No. 37 Park Lane, stands on a plot sub-leased by Edmund Rush, mason, to John Adams, glazier, in 1756. (ref. 182) It is broader than were other houses between Wood’s Mews and Green Street, having five windows towards Park Lane, four towards Dunraven (formerly Norfolk) Street, and stucco on all three elevations (Plates 73b [picture above], 74e [see below]). Almost certainly it is an entire replacement of the previous house on the site, which was smaller and was entered from Norfolk Street. The Greek style of the present broad porch and passage towards Park Lane and of the surviving interior features (Plates 74c, 75c), principally a fine staircase from ground- to first-floor level, suggest that this reconstruction took place in about 1822, when a new lease came into operation, but there is no certain evidence on the point. (ref. 183) Possibly somewhat later, an elaborate first-floor verandah was added, with a conservatory over the entrance passage.

The detail of No. 117’s hall (plate 74c), c1978: 

No. 117’s Chimney piece (plate 75c), also c1978:

In 1884 the house was taken by Robert Wellesley Grosvenor, subsequently second Lord Ebury, a first cousin to the Duke of Westminster. On his behalf new rooms were erected on the top, and the exterior was painted, ‘orange colour with a deeper shade for the ground floor’ being suggested. (ref. 184) In 1903 the next occupant, Victor Cavendish, M.P., added a completely new top storey. (ref. 185) On succeeding in 1908 as ninth Duke of Devonshire he moved to the family mansion in Piccadilly. The house then fell empty and a proposal by John Garlick to refront it came to nothing. But in 1911 Lord Moreton took it on, and his family remained here for some years. (ref. 186)

The house suffered some damage in the war of 1939–45, and much renovation took place in 1948–9 under the direction of C. Edmund Wilford for Hammersons, the developers. Inter alia, the approach from Park Lane and the verandah above were simplified. (ref. 187)

Occupants include: Countess of Huntingdon, wid. of 9th Earl and foundress of ‘Lady Huntingdon’s Connexion’ of Calvinistic Methodists, 1759–62. Lieut.-gen. Lord John Murray, son of 1st Duke of Atholl, 1764–70. Lady Cunliffe, wid. of Sir Ellis Cunliffe, 1st bt., 1771–1814: her son-in-law, William Gosling, banker, 1816–27. Robert Wellesley Grosvenor, latterly 2nd Baron Ebury, 1884–94. Victor Cavendish, M.P., later 9th Duke of Devonshire, 1895–1908. Lord Moreton, son of 3rd Earl of Ducie, 1911–20: his wid., 1920–44.

(plate 74e): No. 117 Park Lane (Dunraven Street front), in 1976:

There is NO WAY William lived there; he had his own home in Portland Place (never mind at Roehampton Grove; as well as the estate of Hassobury). Lady Cunliffe died in 1814, so what happened after that event is up for grabs. Mary and Charles can only be placed there (at present) in 1827. Eliza Chute, interestingly enough, mentions Norfolk Street (no number) in all her early diaries: being a bosom friend to Eliza Gosling (even when she was still Eliza Cunliffe), Eliza Smith (as she was before her marriage) visited Miss and Lady Cunliffe quite often when in town with her father Joshua Smith.