The Life of the Governess: Selina Trimmer

by Lauren Gilbert

The Governess by Richard Redgrave

Governesses were a necessary feature in upper class Regency households with children. In literature, their lives are seldom discussed with admiration or envy, sometimes not even with respect. In Jane Austen’s novel, 'Emma', the marriage of Emma’s governess to Mr. Weston was celebrated not least for the drastic improvement of her status from governess to wife of a respectable man in local society. In the same novel, Jane Fairfax referred to the prospect of becoming a governess in bleak terms “...Offices for the sale – not quite of human flesh – but of human intellect.”

The governess was not on equal footing with the family but of higher status than other servants, a lonely position. Maria Grace described the duties and position of governess well in her excellent post Here. However, with all its difficulties and limitations, the position of governess was one of few respectable alternatives for an educated woman of no means to support herself, and could, at least in some cases, provide opportunities for satisfaction, a measure of security and even affection. Some of these can be found in the lives of two governesses during the Regency era: Selina Trimmer and Agnes Porter. In this post, we will first meet Selina Trimmer.

In order to get a glimpse of Selina Trimmer, it is important to know her mother. Selina was the daughter of Sarah Kirby Trimmer, an education reformer, writer and philanthropist. She founded several schools, Sunday schools as well as charity schools, and questioned many of the attitudes and customs regarding women and family then in place. From a genteel family, she was living at Kew (thanks to her father’s appointment as clerk of works in the palace) when she met James Trimmer, whom she married. They had twelve children, six boys and six girls. She was primarily a wife and mother, who educated her children herself at home (the boys until they went to school) with the assistance of her husband, and became passionate about education.

Sarah read all of the books intended for her children, and selected reading specifically for each child. She herself wrote between thirty and fifty books, including text books, children’s literature, teaching manuals, and more. Sarah was also deeply religious, believed in rank and the social structure of her time (the poor were meant to be poor, in her estimation), and she embedded a strong religious and moral foundation into her educational program. She placed her students in positions, including positions as governess in respectable households. As Mrs. Trimmer became known for her interest in education, her schools and her writing, she became influential; even the Queen asked her advice regarding the founding of a school.

Selina (actually named Sarah, like her mother) was the second child, and second daughter, born to Mr and Mrs Trimmer. She was born August 16, 1764, and was thoroughly educated at home by her mother. Mrs. Trimmer took her children to visit their grandparents regularly. She was literally surrounded by books and educational theory throughout her childhood and young adulthood. She did not marry, and references to her are limited to her position as governess in the family of the Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire. I found no biography of Selina, and she appears in the background as a minor character when reading of the Duchess and her children, and her niece Caroline Lamb. However, there was much more to Selina Trimmer than first appeared. An interesting question: how did she get into the Devonshire household?

Margaret Georgiana Poyntz Spencer, Countess Spencer, was the mother of Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire. She was a very intelligent, well-educated woman, who was interested in philanthropy and education herself. She and her husband John, Earl Spencer were noted patrons of writers and artists. Although I have found no specific reference to support this, I find it hard to believe that Lady Spencer did not at some point make the acquaintance of Mrs. Trimmer and possibly her daughter. 

There is no doubt that Lady Spencer was instrumental in inserting Selina into the Duchess’s household. Lady Spencer had long been concerned about and vastly disapproving of the intimate friendship Georgiana had formed with Lady Elizabeth Foster, who had also become the intimate friend of Georgiana’s husband, the Duke of Devonshire. Elizabeth had also been hired as governess to the Duke’s illegitimate daughter Charlotte and was to accompany Charlotte to France. Unfortunately, in Lady Spencer’s view, this separation did not cool the friendship. Lady Spencer also disapproved severely of Georgiana’s own behaviour, particularly the gambling, the interest in politics and her other activities.

The Duchess of Devonshire by Joshua Reynolds (with Little G)

By 1785, Georgiana had two daughters with the Duke, and Bess also had a daughter with him. (I do not propose to go into all of the particulars of the activities of the Devonshire House set. Suffice to say, Lady Spencer found plenty about which to be upset, not only with Georgiana and her activities, her son-in-law, and their live-in friend Elizabeth, but with her younger daughter Harriet Ponsonby, Lady Bessborough, the mother of Caroline Ponsonby who became Lady Caroline Lamb.) I am speculating here, but it seems highly likely that Lady Spencer would have consulted with Mrs. Sarah Trimmer regarding her daughters’ children, their need for a governess who was not only intelligent and well educated, but of strong moral fibre, to counteract the bad influences swirling around them. Who better than Mrs. Trimmer’s own daughter?

Selina was already in the household as governess when Georgiana conceived her third child while in France in 1789 with her husband and Elizabeth. There are hints that Lady Spencer had managed to insert her in the Devonshire household, and that Selina reported to Lady Spencer even at this early date. Apparently the entire family was together when the longed-for son William, the Marquise of Hartington, was born May 21, 1790.

Lady Spencer returned to England with the children in July, which was apparently the point that Lady Spencer actually became friendly with Selina, and saw an opportunity to try to reform her daughter’s household from within. Multiple accounts indicate that Selina reported the intimate goings-on in the household to Lady Spencer, and was influenced by Lady Spencer’s displeasure with those goings on and desire to rid the household of Lady Elizabeth. Selina was particularly disapproving of the presence of Lady Elizabeth in the household (a ménage a’ trois, by all accounts), and made her disapproval known to the lady in no uncertain terms.

Lady Elizabeth Foster by Sir Joshua Reynolds

Fanny Burney met Selina Trimmer in the Duchess’s household, and was apparently not impressed, finding her neither natural nor simple in manner, plain, yet in possession of her mother Sarah’s pleasant calm. Most accounts describe her as friendly and well-liked, yet easily worn down. (Apparently, despite her education and moral rectitude, Selina was not a harsh disciplinarian; it seems her charges were able to get around her.) She was considered quite learned and imbued her lessons with the religious morality learned from her mother, which must have been a source of satisfaction to Lady Spencer.

When in October of 1791, the Duke of Devonshire ordered Georgiana (who was pregnant with Charles Grey’s child) to go abroad, Selina had sole care of the three children at Devonshire House in London. During the two years that the Duchess was separated from her children, Selina Trimmer assisted her in maintaining contact with her children by letter, and kept her informed on their activities. The Duchess was allowed to return in September of 1793, which created further awkwardness.

The children had developed difficulties in the Duchess’s absence: under the strictly moral program of education formulated by Miss Trimmer (and, I’m sure, approved by Lady Spencer), Georgiana (“Little G”, the oldest child of the Duke and Duchess of Devonshire) had become morbidly religious, worried about sin and with no self-confidence; Harriet (“Harry-O”) was reserved and very sensitive; their son William (the Marquise of Hartington, called “Hart”) had had an infection that resulted in his near-deafness, didn’t remember Georgiana at all, and had grown from a cuddly baby to an angry toddler.

Georgiana would hardly have been human if she had not resented these issues with her children, and blamed Selina at least in part. Selina, on the other hand, was accustomed to having free rein with the children and disliked the duchess trying to take back control of the children’s care. The tension was exacerbated by the duchess’ awareness that Selina was continuing to report to her mother. It took three years for the two women to come to terms and rebuild a semblance of trust between them.

The children were all genuinely fond of Selina and, even after the Duchess had restored her relationship with her children to some degree and regained some control over their upbringing, the Duchess continued to rely on Selina and encouraged her children to appreciate the care Selina had given them. There are letters in the Chatsworth archives written by the children that show their continuing affection for her even after they reached adulthood.

About 1794, the household included the Duchess’s niece, Caroline Ponsonby, who created her own excitement with her lively curiosity and intense emotional swings. Selina was limited in her ability to challenge Caroline’s intellectual curiosity as much as she may have wished, as the doctors recommended that Caroline be discouraged from applying herself to her study and to refrain from stimulation in hopes of calming her. However, Caroline was a great reader and developed a talent for writing. As the girls grew up, Selina acted as their chaperon and companion.

Lady Caroline Lamb

Selina remained in the Devonshire household even after both girls had come out and Hart had gone to Harrow in 1801. When the Duchess became ill in March of 1806, the Duke asked Selina to remain with them to attend to the household during her illness and decline. The Duchess died on March 30, 1806. By this time, Little G was married and in her own household. Harriet, the oldest daughter at home, assumed she would be in control of the household (at least to the extent of sitting in her mother’s place at table and being the hostess) but, to her chagrin, found the role taken by Lady Elizabeth. Neither of Georgiana’s daughters had ever liked Elizabeth, and they greatly resented her continued presence in the house and their father’s life.

Harriet kept Selina with her to avoid having to appear with Lady Elizabeth. This was a particularly difficult time for Selina as Lady Elizabeth, in her role as chatelaine, apparently decided to avenge past slights and made Selina’s life very uncomfortable by criticizing and contradicting her. There is an indication that Selina left Devonshire House in November of 1806. If she did leave, it was not permanent because she was back with Harriet (“Harry-O”) in 1807. Regardless of the emotional highs or lows, there is no indication that Selina was forced to look elsewhere or that her life was unpleasant enough for Selina to want to move on.

Elizabeth married the Duke of Devonshire on October 19, 1809, yet another cause for uproar within the family. However, she was received into society and the situation calmed. Regrettably, the Duke became ill in July of 1811, and died July 29th. Unfortunately for Elizabeth, he died leaving financial matters for his son by Elizabeth unclear. Selina joined other family members in counselling the new Duke (Hart) to make an appropriate settlement for his half-brother. Selina was recommended to Princess Charlotte as a possible candidate to become governess to the Princess’s expected child, but stayed on in the Devonshire household. Princess Charlotte died in childbirth November 6, 1817.

When the late Duchess of Devonshire’s beloved sister Harriet (Lady Bessborough and Lady Caroline Lamb’s mother) became ill, Caroline became very agitated. When Lady Bessborough died, Selina stepped into the breach and stayed with Caroline in London prior to the funeral, to be held December 31, 1821 (Harriet was buried at Chatsworth). Caroline was distraught, contemplating suicide, and under medical care during this time. Selina went to Brocket, the Lamb’s country home, with Caroline, and then on to Chatsworth with her, although Caroline did not actually attend the funeral.

Selina Trimmer was a valued member of the Devonshire household from approximately 1788 or 1789 until at least 1821, a period of over 30 years. Throughout this tumultuous period, in spite of the intrigue and factions within the household, the Duke and Duchess of Devonshire and Lady Spencer obviously respected Selina and held her in high regard. The children apparently held her in affection, as their letters indicate.

She had at least one significant opportunity to change positions to her advantage and chose not to do so, which argues that she was content with her situation with the Devonshires. (Even though the Princess died, the fact that such a recommendation had been made is in indication that Selina could have obtained another position without much difficulty had she genuinely wish to do so.) In dire situations, the family turned to Selina for support and she remained a person of influence. Selina Trimmer died in 1829. Although I could not find the exact date of her death or the location of her grave, there is nothing to indicate that her connection with the family of the Duke of Devonshire was severed prior to her passing.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sources include:

Austen, Jane. EMMA. The Oxford Illustrated Jane Austen. Oxford University Press, Oxford, England, 1988.

Chapman, Caroline. ELIZABETH AND GEORGIANA The Duke of Devonshire and His Two Duchesses. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2002.

Douglass, Paul. LADY CAROLINE LAMB A Biography. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2004.

Foreman, Amanda. GEORGIANA Duchess of Devonshire. New York: Radom House, 1998.

English Historical Fiction Authors blog. “Professional Household Staff, A Cut Above the Servants,” by Maria Grace, Feb 17, 2016. Here.

GoogleBooks. Mrs. Trimmer (Sarah). SOME ACCOUNT OF THE LIFE AND WRITINGS OF MRS. TRIMMER. London: C & J Rivington, 1825. Here.

All images are from WikimediaCommons:

The Governess, by Richard Redgrave, 1844: Here.

The Duchess of Devonshire and Lady Elizabeth Foster: Here.

Lady Caroline Lamb: Here.

                                                                                                                                                            

Lauren Gilbert, author of HEYERWOOD: A Novel, has always been fascinated by the Regency era.  She lives in Florida with her husband, and is working on her next novel.  Visit her website here to find out more.

Elizabeth Milbanke Lamb, The Formidable Lady Melbourne

By Lauren Gilbert


The Milbanke and Melbourne Families, c 1770, by George Stubbs

Her date of birth apparently unknown, Elizabeth Milbanke was baptized Oct 15, 1751 at Croft-on-Trees Yorkshire. Her father was Sir Ralph Milbanke (5th baronet), and her mother Elizabeth Hedworth. The family home was Halnaby Hall in Yorkshire. Her father and her mother’s father were both political (her grandfather was a member of parliament for County Durham). Elizabeth was intelligent and educated privately (probably at home), her studies including French, and poetry. Her brother Ralph inherited their father’s title. Her mother died in 1767, when Elizabeth was approximately 15 years old.

In 1769, at about age 17, Elizabeth met and married Sir Peniston Lamb, who was 24 years old, the marriage being celebrated on April 13 1769 in London. He was the 2nd baronet, and they promptly moved to London. It was a marriage of mutual advantage: her lineage was better and she brought 10,000 pounds to the marriage; he provided her access to the highest level of London society. He was a Whig politician, representing at one time the Borough of Malmsbury, and Elizabeth quickly found her feet as a political hostess. She also developed a good head for business, and organized her husband’s financial affairs, including overseeing the building of Melbourne House in Piccadilly, London. Sir Peniston obtained an Irish peerage as Lord Melbourne, Baron of Kilmore in 1771. In 1781, he was elevated to Viscount Melbourne.

Sir Peniston was almost immediately unfaithful, which Elizabeth accepted with tolerance, if not with grace. Elizabeth was beautiful, intelligent, and had the gift for making guests feel at ease, so became a successful hostess quickly. She also attracted confidences, which she remembered for future reference. Rather than show pique at her husband’s straying, Elizabeth focused her efforts on her activities as a reigning hostess and in making friendships that could be advantageous to her husband’s and family’s advancement. In time, these friendships included men, and involved affairs. Calm, rational, with a caustic wit, she seemed to be more comfortable with men than women. The first child, a son named Peniston born in 1770, was definitely Sir Peniston’s child. After that, who knew? It must be said that Sir Peniston accepted her affairs with the same toleration that she showed with his, including the children born of them. Elizabeth knew what Society expected and what Society would tolerate, and managed these activities with discretion.

A significant friendship ensued in 1774, when William Cavendish, the 5th Duke of Devonshire, married Georgiana Spencer. Elizabeth was quick to make friends with Georgiana, and became a mentor to her. (Since the Duchess of Devonshire had a better pedigree, more money and much higher rank, it was a way for Elizabeth to preserve her sphere of influence as a leader of society.) It may be said that Lady Melbourne kept her friends close, but kept her rivals closer by making friends with them. She was pragmatic and ruthless in her way.

Another significant friendship was that with Lord George Wyndham, 3rd Earl of Egremont. Lord Egremont was an advisor who educated her in agricultural and other business matters. He never married, and the friendship became romantic. Lord Egremont was supposedly the father of Elizabeth’s children William born 1779, Frederick born 1782, and Emily born 1787, all of whom were accepted by Sir Peniston. (The fact that he never married was attributed to Lady Melbourne’s influence in some sources.)

In 1782, Lady Melbourne became acquainted with George, the Prince of Wales. Their friendship developed into a fruitful relationship, resulting in an appointment as Gentleman of the Bedchamber at Carlton House for her husband in 1783, and another child, significantly named George, who was born in 1784 and widely believed to be the prince’s son. When that romance cooled about 1786, she resumed (assuming it had been interrupted) her relationship with Lord Egremont, as witnessed by the birth of Emily. Even so, she managed to maintain her friendship with the prince and a marital relationship with Sir Peniston. Harriet, the youngest child of the marriage, was born in 1789, and was believed to have been the only other child born by Lady Melbourne to her husband. Sadly, Harriet died of consumption (tuberculosis) on June 7, 1803, a devastating blow to Lady Melbourne. She was a devoted mother to her children, keenly interested in their development and studies. All of the children spent most of their time at the country estate of Brocket Hall in Hertfordshire, until the boys went to Eton. (Supposedly it was while visiting her son Peniston at Eton that she made the acquaintance of the Prince in 1782.)

The oldest son Peniston died January 24, 1805 of tuberculosis. Peniston had been his father’s favourite, and by all accounts was indulged by Sir Peniston, who gave him a personal allowance of 5000 pounds per year, allowed him to leave school early to travel the Continent, and engage in basically frivolous pastimes. Young Peniston was apparently very intelligent and replaced his father as MP for Newport, but was not particularly interested in politics and did very little. According to some sources, Peniston died in the arms of his mistress, whom Lady Melbourne brought to her son to comfort his last moments. The occasion of Peniston’s death is noted as the only time that Sir Peniston complained about his wife’s affairs, as young Peniston’s death meant that his heir would not be a child of his body. That heir was the second son, William, who also happened to be Lady Melbourne’s favourite. William had studied law, and entered into politics with real interest. His career and success became a primary focus for Lady Melbourne.



Peniston Lamb, 1805


Although Elizabeth maintained her friendship with Georgiana, the Duchess of Devonshire, she thoroughly disliked Harriet Ponsonby, Countess of Bessborough, the Duchess of Devonshire’s sister, and Caroline Ponsonby, the Countess’s daughter, as well. This dislike, however, did not prevent her from accepting her son William’s engagement and marriage in 1805 to Caroline. Lady Melbourne was a devoted mother, who was laser-focused on advancing her children’s interest at every turn by any means necessary, and was able to set aside her dislike since Caroline’s superior pedigree and influential relatives gave the match all the appearance of an advantageous one. This courtship and marriage started an explosive chain of events.

I do not propose to get into a detailed discussion of the life and affairs of Lady Caroline Lamb (the subject of many blogs, biographies and novels) but it is impossible to talk about Lady Melbourne without reference to her relationship with her daughter-in-law. In a word, bad. It is hard to imagine two ladies with less in common than Elizabeth and Caroline Lamb. From their appearance (Lady Melbourne being tall, full-fleshed and commanding vs. Caroline being slender, delicate and clinging) to their interests and personalities, they were almost direct opposites. As mentioned before, Elizabeth never liked Caroline or her mother, and she deeply resented Caroline’s influence over her son William. While pursuing and after wedding Caroline, William neglected his political career to enjoy the entertainments of the Devonshire set.



Caroline Lamb, by Eliza Trotter


Caroline was undisciplined and uncontrolled, intelligent but not well-educated, willing to have violent tantrums, had no concept of discretion or reticence, and unable to brook any restraint. Lady Melbourne was controlled, as well as controlling, even tempered, discreet, well-educated with a sharp wit and not reluctant to show her contempt for Caroline and her mother. William and Caroline lived on a floor in Melbourne Hall, which can only have exacerbated things to the maximum. In time, the marriage became difficult, and stressed even further after the birth of their son George in 1807, who was later found to be disabled. Then Caroline had a flirt, possibly an affair, with Sir Godfrey Webster in 1810, which alienated Lady Melbourne further.

Then, into this volatile mixture, we drop George Gordon Byron, the 6th Baron Byron and poet. Lady Melbourne was a mature woman (approximately 54 years old at the time of William’s marriage to Caroline in 1805) but she was a fascinating companion and still attractive to men. In 1811, Caroline met Lord Byron and by the middle of 1812, their affair was public knowledge. At some point, Lady Melbourne met Byron and developed a personal relationship with him herself, sharing letters from Caroline as well as engaging in her own correspondence with him. Although there was a large age difference (she was in her 60’s when he was in her 20’s), she was a fascinating correspondent, and subtly influenced Byron with her criticisms of Caroline.

Lady Melbourne’s brother’s daughter Anne Isabella Milbanke (known as Annabella) was in London, and was introduced to her aunt and society. Annabella managed to attract Byron’s by appearing cool and disapproving, at a point where his attraction to Caroline’s passions was wearing thin. William’s neglect of his political career put him out of office, which disappointed Lady Melbourne even further. Lady Melbourne and Byron communicated frequently during this time. Annabella found her interest focused on Byron; the couple ended up engaged in 1814, in spite of her doubts and his basic reluctance, thanks in no small part to Lady Melbourne’s machinations and encouragement. While Caroline was trying to hold Byron’s interest, Lady Melbourne and, to a lesser degree, Annabella were busy redirecting it. Ultimately, Caroline was completely out-classed in the Byron contest, in spite of her numerous and increasingly brazen attempts to recover his interest. The affair was over by the end of 1812; unfortunately, Caroline didn’t know it.

This was a tumultuous time for all concerned, with Caroline continuing her brazen behaviour and her pursuit of Byron, Byron’s relationships with his wife and half-sister becoming more bizarre, and Lady Melbourne still in touch with all. In 1816, William had almost reached the end of his tether, and (to the he relief, if not the pleasure, of his family) was on the brink of giving up on Caroline, Byron’s marriage to Annabella was falling apart, and everyone was exhausted. In the midst of the drama, Lord Melbourne achieved his peerage as Baron Melbourne in 1815. In April of 1816, Byron left England and William was ready to break with Caroline, to the pleasure of many, especially Lady Byron and his sister Emily. The straw that almost finished it was Caroline’s novel, GLENARVON, in which Caroline portrayed herself as the innocent victim of her husband and all of society (with recognizable portraits of friends and family). Caroline was basically cast out by society, and almost cast out by William. In spite of Lady Melbourne’s best efforts and the wishes of his family, he kept her as his wife until she died.

This long-running serial of her battle with her daughter-in-law (who was really not an equal combatant), I believe, shows all of Lady Melbourne’s least attractive traits: she was determined to dominate, overwhelmingly ambitious, certain she knew best, and willing to do whatever it took to accomplish her ends. She was cynical, hard and unconcerned with morality once she had decided what she wanted. This pattern continued throughout her life; she was less concerned with right than with expedience. She was shrewd and ambitious for her family, but somehow heartless.

Lady Melbourne died April 6, 1818 at Melbourne House in Whitehall. It was a protracted and painful death, attributed to rheumatism. All of her children except Frederick seemed to have been present. She was buried at Hatfield House in Hertfordshire. At the time of her death, none of her children had lived up to her ambitions for them. That lay all in the future: William resume his political career and became Prime Minister for Victoria; Emily married her lover Lord Palmerston (with Queen Victoria’s permission) and became the wife of a prime minister. Lord Melbourne, her husband outlived her, passing away in 1828.


Sources include:

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

Cecil, David. The Young Melbourne. Bobbs-Merrill Company, Indianapolis and New York: 1939.

Douglass, Paul. Lady Caroline Lamb, A Biography. New York, Palgrave McMillan: 2004.

Foreman, Amanda. Georgiana Duchess of Devonshire. New York, Random House: 1998.

Gross, Jonathan David, ed. Byron’s “Corbeau Blanc” The Life and Letters of Lady Melbourne. Texas A & M, 1998 (original published by Rice University, 1998).

History and Other Thoughts blog. “Elizabeth Lamb, Viscountess Melbourne.” Read here.
World of the Marchioness blog. “Caroline Lamb: Family Connections-Brocket Hall.” August 17, 2014. Read here.


Image Attributions: 

The Milbanke and Melbourne Families, from Wikimedia Commons here.

Peniston Lamb, from Wikimedia Commons here.

Caroline Lamb, from Wikimedia Commons here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Lauren Gilbert is the author of HEYERWOOD: A Novel, released in 2011, and is working on A RATIONAL ATTACMENT, due out later this year. A long-time resident of Florida, she lives with her husband. Visit her website here for more information.

Beauty and Georgian Society

by Grace Elliot

What is beauty?

In the 18^th century, according to the Morning Post, a true beauty not only had good looks and a pleasing figure, but wit, grace, sensibility, elegance, good sense, expression, and principle. (Note: Modesty is absent from the list, but perhaps this falls under good sense or principles.) Indeed, in October 1776, the paper published a ‘Scale of Bon Ton’ that listed 12 of society’s most fashionable women as ranked by a point-scoring scheme.

Georgiana Cavendish, Duchess of Devonshire
1787

In case you are wondering, the Duchess of Devonshire topped the list, hotly followed by the Duchess or Gordon, then the Countess of Derby.  Ranking beauties against one another was very popular, and only the month before the London Chronicle had published its own ‘Scale of Beauties’ – again with the Duchess of Devonshire ahead of the rest.

There’s no denying that the majority of these women were indeed attractive, but more than that, it was difficult for a woman not of noble blood to be a beauty in the fullest Georgian sense of the word, because they simply didn’t have the breeding. The concept of beauty was closely tied to ideas of behaviour and manners such that someone with good looks but lacking the correct social niceties  was left sadly short of that vital ‘something’ that made her acceptable as a society beauty.

All of which is as good as any yard stick to base the concept of ‘beauty’ on, since it is such a subjective thing. Even at the time, people debated (as they have done since time immemorial) the essence of beauty. A poem, written in 1733, titled ‘Beauty and Proportion’ extolled the virtue of symmetry with ‘a roman nose, high turn’d forehead and well-set eye.’

But someone with a good appreciation of beauty, the artist William Hogarth, writing in the mid-18^th century, argued that disorderly style in the form of curved lines and uneven structures was a greater delight to the eye.

From the Harlot's Progress, by William Hogarth
Hogarth was well known for his cutting observations on social manners

A little later in 1795, the Dictionary of Love catalogued beauty in 28 points or of which the foremost was ‘Youth’. Understandable then, that some women turned to cosmetics to cheat the clock and make them appear younger. But this too was frowned upon, not least because makeup could be purchased by anyone to create the illusion of beauty and thus cheat the viewer.

Part of the problem with makeup was that it was so thick that it obscured many blemishes and imperfections. Whilst a noble lady was cossetted and often protected from some of the diseases that could devastate a complexion, a lady of lower birth was not. Therefore a perfect skin was a badge, a mark of superior rank. However, the use of makeup blurred this boundary and made it less clear for all to see.

It was argued that titled women should avoid ‘paint’ because it lowered them to the level of ‘inferiors’. This is all very well, for many young women in society who needed to make a good marriage but with average looks, the clever use of makeup seemed a Godsend to make them more attractive.

Maria, Countess of Coventry
1751

At the time, much makeup contained lead, so perhaps there was wisdom (but for a different reason) behind avoiding artificial props. Perhaps one the most famous cautionary tales is that of Maria, Countess of Coventry, who rose to fame because of her stunning looks, but died because of lead poisoning from her makeup. Such was the pressure to maintain her status as a beauty that the means of maintaining an outward appearance of loveliness was ultimately her end. A salient lesson indeed.

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

Grace Elliot is a veterinarian and writer.  

To find out more, visit her blog:

Fall in Love with History