Short, Simple and to the Point: Regency Weddings

by Maria Grace

Today’s brides may spend a year or more planning a wedding. Having a dress made, planning the reception in every detail and the cake—oh the cake!—are the stuff of many a young woman’s dreams. So much so, discovering the details of a Regency era wedding might turn out a bit disappointing since most of the elaborate traditions we associate with weddings today originated decades later, during the Victorian Era.

Wedding Dress 

Modern brides often spend a great deal of attention and money on the wedding dress and expect to wear it only once. Honestly, it is hard to imagine another event where wearing one’s wedding dress might be appropriate. Not exactly the sort of thing you’d wear to dinner, right?

In the regency era, though, the cost of textiles was so prohibitive that only royals like Princess Charlotte and equally wealthy brides even considered dresses that might only be worn once. So, a bride, wore her ‘best dress’ for her wedding. A bride with some means, might have a new ‘best dress’ made for the occasion.

What might this ‘best dress’ look like? Typically it would not be white. White garments required a huge amount of upkeep in an era where all wash was done by hand, so only the wealthiest wore it. Colored gowns were typical, with yellow, blue, pink and green being popular for several regency era years. Middle and lower class brides often chose black, dark brown and burgundy as practical colors that would wear well for years to come.

Fashion plates from Ackerman’s and La Belle Assemblee illustrate gowns used for weddings. All though all these gowns are white, that is more indicative of the white gown being the ‘little black dress’ of the era, rather than white being the wedding color.

All these gowns followed the fashionable trends of formal gowns of the day, but were largely indistinguishable from other formal gowns, attested to by the La Belle Assemblee dress being cited as both an evening dress and a wedding dress. Finer materials might be utilized if the bride could afford: silks, satins and lace. The trims might be altered for wear after the wedding.

None of these fashion plate brides wore a veil. That fashion, though common in France, would not take hold in England until the Victorian era. Caps, hats, bonnets or flowers in the hair were common though.

“Since wedding gowns were often worn - to the point of being worn out - after the wedding, brides had to cherish something else. Often this was one of her wedding shoes, a natural choice given the lucky connotations of shoes in this context. Many carefully preserved satin slippers remain with notes inscribed in the instep attesting to the wearer's wedding.” (Reeves-Brown)

Groom’s Attire

Men’s formal attire, not unlike today, was fairly well established, largely due to the influence of Beau Brummell. White shirts of muslin or linen, with a white cravat, ideally in silk. A black or dark cut away, tailed jacket, with buttons left open to show a waistcoat. (Although some period reports note grooms in light colored suits as well.) The waistcoat might be brightly colored and richly embroidered, the one place on a man’s ensemble where bright colors were widely acceptable. Dark or black knee breeches, skin tight of course! Loose fitting trousers were generally not acceptable for a formal occasion until the later part of the regency. Black stockings and black pumps, never boots, and a top hat would finish the ensemble.

Invitations and Announcements

Unlike weddings today, the wedding ceremony was not a widely attended event. Obviously the bride and groom, along with their witnesses, usually the bridesmaid and groomsman and the clergyman were there. Close family might be there and possibly local close friends, but that was all. People did not generally travel to attend a wedding, so few if any invitations were issued. Neighbors and other well-wishers would not attend the service, but might wait outside the church for the couple to emerge.

The newspaper announcement, in both a national and local newspaper was, arguably, the most socially important facet of the wedding. “Jane Austen once wrote, ‘The latter writes me word that Miss Blackford is married, but I have never seen it in the papers, and one may as well be single if the wedding is not to be in print.’” (Forsling, Weddings During the Regency.)Sometimes the announcements did not even give the name of the bride, just her father’s name—and any titled connections, because who would dare forget them?

Ceremony

Regency era wedding ceremonies were simple and entirely determined by the prescribed service in the Book of Common Prayer. The only requirements were the clergyman, parish clerk to ensure formal logging in the register, and two witnesses.

All weddings, except those by special license, took place between 8 AM and noon. (The reasons? Honorable people had nothing to fear in the light of day and people would be more serious in the morning.) Any day of the week was acceptable, though Sundays might be a bit inconvenient. Certain holy days, especially Lent were traditionally avoided.

Most people walked to church instead of riding in a carriage. Of course, most people did not have a carriage to ride in either. Flowers, herbs or rushes might be scattered on the route or at the church porch.

As with many weddings today, the bride’s father (if present) would present the bride to the groom. The vows would be read from the Book of Common Prayer and a wedding ring, or rings exchanged.

Interestingly, ring or rings were integral to the ceremony and it could not take place without them. The rings could be plain or ornate, precious metals like gold, or less dear materials like brass. “Lord Byron claimed that the wedding ring was 'the damnedest part of matrimony' but married men wore them as often as not, engraved with the couple's initials and the date of union.” (Jones, 2009)

Marriage lines

After the ceremony, the clergyman, parish clerk, bride, groom, and two witnesses would proceed to the vestry to enter the ‘marriage lines’ into the parish register book. These ‘lines’ were explicitly set out in the Hardwicke Act and constituted the official record of the wedding, legal proof that it had taken place.

A copy of the records would be made and signed by all participants in the ceremony. The marriage lines would then be given to the new bride, notably her property, not the groom’s.

Why? 

“Proof of her married state was much more important to a woman than to a man. Particularly among … the lower classes, a woman’s social standing, in some cases her very survival, depended upon her ability to prove she was a respectable married woman. …A woman who was thought to be living with a man without benefit of clergy could be exposed to any number of dangers. She could not depend on her husband for support if she could not prove she was his legal wife, … she might even be liable to arrest and incarceration as a prostitute. If she was a widow, she could be denied her lawful dower rights, even custody of her own children. … her "marriage lines" were proof of one of the most important achievements of her life, and might be her best protection against life’s vicissitudes.” (Kane, 2008)

Wedding Breakfast

Since weddings were held in the morning, the meal eaten afterwards was considered breakfast. "The breakfast was such as best breakfasts then were: some variety of bread, hot rolls, buttered toast, tongue or ham and eggs. The addition of chocolate [drinking chocolate] at one end of the table, and wedding cake in the middle, marked the specialty of the day."(Austen -Leigh,1920)

Unlike the wedding ceremony, friends and relatives were usually invited to the wedding breakfast. Sometimes, though, the bride and groom set off for the post-nuptial travels immediately from the church door, leaving their loved ones to celebrate on their own.

Wedding Cake

Though wedding cakes were baked for most weddings, they were very different from what we envision today. The cake resembled fruitcake, soaked with liberal amounts of alcohol: wine, brandy or rum. Usually the cakes would be covered in almond icing which was then browned in the oven. If a family wanted to display wealth, the cake would be covered in refined sugar icing and left very white. Pure white, refined sugar was very expensive and a sign of affluence. Elizabeth Raffald, in The Experienced English Housekeeper, published the first recipe for such a cake.

With all the alcohol, wedding cakes kept for a long time. Pieces would be sent home with family and friends, delivered to neighbors and even send over distances to those who could not be part of the celebrations.

Honeymoons

After the wedding and possibly the breakfast, a newlywed couple would usually go to the husband’s house. If the couple planned a wedding trip, they usually departed a week or so later.

Since the war (and finances for most people) made touring the continent out of the question, couples of the era usually planned trips closer to home. They might visit relations to make introductions (and cut down on travel costs) or visit picturesque landscapes like the Lake District or Peaks or seaside resorts like Brighton.

Often, the bride's sister or closest female friend accompanied the couple. To the modern eye the custom seems weird at best, but since the bride and groom might have spent little time alone with one another prior to the wedding, relying only on one another for conversation and company could be very awkward. Having another person along could ease the transition for everyone.

References:

Allen, Louise. Banns or Licence? Ways To Marry in Georgian England May 7, 2014 https://janeaustenslondon.com/2014/05/07/banns-or-licence-ways-to-marry-in-georgian-england/ http://www.regencyresearcher.com/pages/marriage.html Accessed 7/24/2016

Austen -Leigh, Mary Augusta. Personal Aspects Of Jane Austen. London John Murray, Albemarle Street. 1920.

Book of Common Prayer. Imprinted at London: By Robert Barker ..., 1632. Book of Common Prayer

Forsling, Yvonne. Weddings During the Regency https://www.janeausten.co.uk/weddings-during-the-regency-era/ Accessed 7/24/2016

Forsling, Yvonne . Regency Weddings: Fashion Periodicals http://hibiscus-sinensis.com/regency/weddingprints.htm Accessed 7/20/2016

Jones, Hazel. Jane Austen and Marriage. London: Continuum, 2009.

Kane, Kathryn. "Marriage Lines" really are lines! 19 December 2008 https://regencyredingote.wordpress.com/2008/12/19/marriage-lines-really-are-lines/

Laudermilk, Sharon H., and Teresa L. Hamlin. The Regency Companion. New York: Garland, 1989.

Raffald, Elizabeth. The Experienced English Housekeeper for the Use and Ease of Ladies, Housekeepers, Cooks, &c. Written Purely from Practice ... Consisting of near Nine Hundred Original Receipts, Most of Which Never Appeared in Print. ... The Tenth Edition. ... By Elizabeth Raffald. London: Printed for R. Baldwin, 1786.

Reeves-Brown, Jessamyn. Regency Wedding Details & History http://www.songsmyth.com/weddings.html. Accessed 7/25/16

Sanborn, Vic. And the Bride Wore… June 17, 2011. https://www.janeausten.co.uk/and-the-bride-wore/. Accessed 7/26/16

Wilson, Carol. Gastronomica: The Journal Of Food And Culture, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 69–72, issn 1529-3262.

Find previous installments of this series here:

Get Me to the Church on Time: Changing Attitudes toward Marriage
To Have a Courtship, One Needs a Suitor
Nothing is ever that simple: Rules of Courtship
Show me the Money: the Business of Courtship
The Price of a Broken Heart
Making an Offer of Marriage
Games of Courtship
The Hows and Why of Eloping
Licenses, Laws and Legalities of Marriage

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

Though Maria Grace has been writing fiction since she was ten years old, those early efforts happily reside in a file drawer and are unlikely to see the light of day again, for which many are grateful. After penning five file-drawer novels in high school, she took a break from writing to pursue college and earn her doctorate. After 16 years of university teaching, she returned to her first love, fiction writing.

Click here to find her books on Amazon. For more on her writing and other Random Bits of Fascination, visit her website. You can also like her on Facebook, follow on Twitter or email 

The Why's and How's of Eloping

by Maria Grace

What could be more romantic than a couple so in love they could not wait to be married and eloping to Gretna Green or some other location for an immediate marriage? 

Turns out eloping could cause quite a bit of trouble, including bringing the legality of the marriage and legitimacy of the children from such a marriage into question. It also put a young woman, especially one with a fortune, in a dangerous position. If the marriage was considered legitimate, her fortune would be irrevocably in the hands of her husband, and she would have no guaranteed provision for her or her children's future. If it was not, her reputation would be ruined and her chances of making a good marriage possibly gone forever. Not exactly a win-win proposition.

If it could cause so much trouble, why would anyone consider it an option? In short, it was a way around the limitations created by the Hardwicke Act for the Prevention of Clandestine Marriages.

The Hardwicke Act

The Hardwicke Act  regulated the institution of marriage, providing clear and consistent rules about who could get married and how it was to be done.

The act stipulated couples must be twenty one years of age or have parental consent to marry. Further either a license must be purchased or banns (an announcement of the intention to marry during the church service) must be read, insuring that the couple was eligible to marry--specifically not otherwise married, engaged to be married, or inappropriately related. Finally the marriage must be conducted in a specified way by authorized clergy and duly recorded in a marriage register, providing definitive proof the marriage occurred.

Why Elope

If a couple was considering eloping, parental consent was the usual fly in the ointment. Sometimes, the reading of the banns might raise an objection. Perhaps one of the parties was promised to marry another, or worse, had already married another. Either could put a crimp on a young couple’s plans. Purchasing a license instead of reading the banns might provide a work around this, but since "The standard license from a bishop required a bond for £100 to be forfeit if the couple lied" (Mayer) about any pertinent detail, the option was not open to many.

How to Elope

With the stipulations of the Hardwicke Act in place, how did a couple manage an elopement?

An obvious solution might be to go somewhere else to get married, like perhaps Scotland. Scottish law merely required two witnesses and a minimum age of sixteen for both parties. (Of course for now, we’ll ignore the fact that whether or not Scottish marriages were legally valid in England was a matter of some debate.)

Gretna Green was just nine miles from the last English staging post at Carlisle and just one mile over the border with Scotland. The town took advantage of the situation and made something of a business in quick marriages, not unlike Las Vegas today. Hence, it was known for elopements, and it became a favorite plot device for romance writers everywhere.

The Trouble with Gretna Green

If it was so simple and convenient, why not go to Gretna Green to marry? Barring the fact that elopements were a good way to get ostracized from good society, there were practical considerations that made it unsuitable for many.

Gretna Green is three hundred twenty miles from London, the largest British population center of the early 1800’s. My local highways boast an eighty or eighty five mile per hour speed limit, so I can travel that distance in half a day, no bother. In the early 1800’s those speeds were unheard of. Most people walked. Everywhere. Only the very wealthy had horses and carriages of their own.

If one were moderately well off, they might purchase tickets on a public conveyance to go long distances. While better than walking, one could still only expect to travel five to seven miles per hour. Traveling twelve hours a day, with only moderate stops to change horses and deal with personal necessities, the trip would take about four days.

Four days packed in a carriage with as many other people as the proprietors could squeeze into the space and more sitting on top of the coach.

A lovely, romantic picture, yeah?

If a couple was wealthy enough to enjoy a private conveyance, they might not have to share the coach with others, but little if any time could be shaved off the trip.

Luckily, Gretna Green was not the only option. Other locations were available to facilitate a clandestine marriage. Towns along the eastern borders of Scotland, like Lamberton, Paxton, Mordington and Coldstream also catered to eloping couples. In some cases, the toll-keepers along the road provided the marriages at the toll houses.

From the south, those willing to sail might go to Southampton, Hampshire and purchase passage to the Channel Islands. The Isle of Guernsey in particular provided another alternative for a quick marriage.

Closer to Home

A far less romantic but simpler, cheaper and closer to home alternative existed. All a couple really had to do was have their banns read for three consecutive weeks in a church, then have the ceremony performed.

In a large urban center, like London, parishes could be huge and the clergy hard-pressed to verify each couple’s age and residency. If a couple could manage to get to a large town, or better London itself, they could lose themselves in the crowd and get married the conventional way and their families were unlikely to get word of it in time to prevent anything.

After such a wedding occurred, the only recourse an aggrieved parent had was to go to the church where the banns had been called and challenge that the banns had been mistaken or even fraudulent. The process was public, inconvenient and embarrassing, and thus not very common.

Despite a Gretna Green (or other Scottish) elopement being a romantic idyll, marrying in a big city parish was by far the most likely way young people married against their parents’ wishes.

 References

Where to Elope in Regency England Linda Banche http://historicalhussies.blogspot.com/2009/08/eloping-in-regency-england.html Wednesday, August 19, 2009

Eloping in Regency England Aug 5 2009 Linda Banche http://historicalhussies.blogspot.com/2009/08/eloping-in-regency-england.html

An Alternative Elopement Laurie Alice Eakes June 25, 2012 http://christianregency.com/blog/2012/06/25/laurie-alice-alternative-elopement/

Mayer, Nancy. Marriage http://www.regencyresearcher.com/pages/marriage.html Accessed 7/14/2016

Find previous installments of this series here:

Get Me to the Church on Time: Changing Attitudes toward Marriage
To Have a Courtship, One Needs a Suitor
Nothing is ever that simple: Rules of Courtship
Show me the Money: the Business of Courtship
The Price of a Broken Heart
Making an Offer of Marriage
Games of Courtship

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

Though Maria Grace has been writing fiction since she was ten years old, those early efforts happily reside in a file drawer and are unlikely to see the light of day again, for which many are grateful. After penning five file-drawer novels in high school, she took a break from writing to pursue college and earn her doctorate. After 16 years of university teaching, she returned to her first love, fiction writing.

Click here to find her books on Amazon. For more on her writing and other Random Bits of Fascination, visit her website. You can also like her on Facebook, follow on Twitter or email 

Games of Courtship

by Maria Grace

In Regency England, courtship and flirtation were very different than they are today. Couples could have very little unchaperoned contact with one another in company and none in private. So anything that might allow them to push those boundaries and keep reputations intact was bound to be popular. 

What’s more, without distractions like television or the internet, all classes of society played parlor games. What else was there to do during the long, dark winter nights when the cost of candles meant that everyone holed up together in one room in the evenings?

So, with everyone playing parlor games, it was only natural that young people—or those not so young—would make use of these pastimes to their greatest advantage.   Games spanned the spectrum from quiet sedate card or word games to very physically active games that could even involve physical touch. Each variety provided opportunities for the courting couple to interact in ways otherwise forbidden by proper society.

Consider how a flirtatious girl or determined beau might make use of games like Buffy Gruffy, Hot Cockles, Move All or How d'ye do? How d'ye do? 

Active Games

In Buffy Gruffy  a blindfolded player stands in the middle of the room while the others arrange their chairs in a circle and silently trade places. Someone claps to start the game. The blindfolded person passes around the chairs and stops in front of one. How one does this without stumbling and falling is rather a mystery, but it certainly does suggest cheating played a big role in the game.

The blindfolded player begins questioning the seated player to determine their identity. The answers are delivered in a disguised voice and with a great deal of evasion. All sorts of touching which would not otherwise have been appropriate might occur in the context of trying to figure out the other player’s identity, the degree largely dependent on what the players wanted to get away with and how diligent their chaperones might chose to be.   

Hot Cockles  took the same notion a step further. In this case the blindfolded player either stood, sat, or most interestingly of all, knelt with their head in another player’s lap. No doubt the Lydia Bennets would push for this version, while any proper chaperone would be having a heart attack.  

Other players would run up and touch the blindfolded person’s shoulder and have them guess who tapped them.  The mind boggles at how an enterprising young beau might use this game to their ends.

If having one’s beau’s head on one’s lap wasn’t enough, Move-all provided the opportunity to have said beau sit in one’s lap—if one managed it all carefully, that is. In this game, chairs are set out in a room, as far apart as possible, with one less chair than player. The chairless player stands in the center and shouts ‘Move all’ and everyone scrambles for a new seat. A great deal of pleasing impropriety might be disguised under the chaos.

Quiet Games

Others games offered the possibility for people to manage covert communications as part and parcel of the play.  In ‘I love my love with an a’, each person picks a letter  and completes the verse about ‘their love’ with words beginning with that letter. Anyone who cannot fulfil their verse or who repeats what has been said by another must pay a forfeit, more on why this might be a desirable outcome in a bit.

The verses used for this game could be short:  I love my love with an A, because she is ardent: I hate her, because she is ambitious : I took her to Andover, to the sign of the Angel : I treated her with artichokes ; and her name is Anne Adair. Or they might be long and rather involved—with the potential to be far more revealing:  I love my love with an S, because she is sensible; I hate her, because she is sarcastic; by way of presents, I gave her Shenstone, a squirrel, a sea-gull, and a sensitive plant; I took her to Salisbury, to the sign of the Sun, and treated her with soup, salmon, sand-larks, shaddocks, and sherry; her name is Selina Smith, and she is dressed in sarsenet.  Talk about an opportunity to get a lot off one's chest, all in the name of good fun!

Direct questions might be asked indirectly in a game of Short Answers. Ladies and gentlemen are seated alternately in a circle. A lady begins by asking her neighbor a question which he answers with a single syllable. Longer answers exact a forfeit for each extra syllable. Furthermore, neither questions nor answers may be repeated lest forfeits be incurred—unless of course that’s what one was looking for…

With Cross Questions and Crooked Answers a little bit of collusion, creativity, and craftiness could result in some interesting declarations. In this game, players sit in a circle. The first player asks their neighbor a question. For example, “What is the use of a cat?" The next player might answer: “To kill the rat, that ate the malt, that lay in the house that Jack built,” or some otherwise ridiculous reply. The answering player then asks a question of their neighbor and receives an answer and so on around the circle.  

Here’s when it could get interesting, though. At the end of the round each player must repeat both the question they asked and the answer they gave (to a different question entirely). A little scheming could lead to some very interesting statements being made.  And if not that, there’s always the potential for forfeits if any player cannot recite their question and answer correctly. (Yes, I know, I promise, I’m getting to that.)

Other Games

Interesting potential of a different sort came in Musical Magic, an amusement in which flirtatious actions could be encouraged and even directed by one's friends.   In this game, one player leaves the room while the others decide on a task or action they want to see that player take. It might be as simple as snuffing a candle, for a novice player, or as complex as kneeling before another player, removing their ring and placing it on the finger of the other player, for one with some experience with the game. 

Another player goes to whatever musical instrument is available and they can play creditably well and the first player returns. That player must then figure out his or her task through the guidance of the background music. The music would grow louder the closer the player got to the next correct action and softer if farther away. The music would stop when the player got the action correct. 

If the player gives up in despair which, honestly, seems like a likely result, then a forfeit must be paid. 

Added Benefit of Forfeits

And now the issue of forfeits and why they might be the whole point of a game.

When someone lost a game, they paid a forfeit. The forfeit could be an elaborate penalty or dare, which might be a great way to get even with one's rival. More often though, they were a thinly disguised machination for getting a kiss, as in the forfeiting player would have to bestow a kiss on someone, often the hostess, but it could be another player. Often, forfeits were accumulated all evening, until the hostess would ‘cry the forfeits’ and they would all be redeemed at once.

Considering how much flirtation and active courting might be going on under the guise of these games, it doesn’t seem at all far-fetched to think that paying or receiving forfeits from the right players might be the whole point after all.

References

Revel, Rachel. Winter Evening Pastimes; Or, the Merry-maker's Companion Containing a Complete Collection of Evening Sports, including Twelfth-night Ceremonies, with Copious Directions for Crying Forfeits, and Promoting Harmless Mirth and Innocent Amusement. The Whole Selected, Altered, and Composed, by Rachel Revel, Spinster. London: Printed for A. Mesnard, 40, Strand, 1825.

Find previous instalments of this series here:

Get Me to the Church on Time: Changing Attitudes toward Marriage
To Have a Courtship, One Needs a Suitor
Nothing is ever that simple: Rules of Courtship
Show me the Money: the Business of Courtship
The Price of a Broken Heart
Making an Offer of Marriage

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

Though Maria Grace has been writing fiction since she was ten years old, those early efforts happily reside in a file drawer and are unlikely to see the light of day again, for which many are grateful. After penning five file-drawer novels in high school, she took a break from writing to pursue college and earn her doctorate. After 16 years of university teaching, she returned to her first love, fiction writing.

Click here to find her books on Amazon. For more on her writing and other Random Bits of Fascination, visit her website. You can also like her on Facebook, follow on Twitter or email 

Making an Offer of Marriage

by Maria Grace

Ideally, the rigors of a 19th century courtship culminated in a proposal, called in the era ‘making a woman an offer of marriage.’ Sounds a bit like a business proposal, doesn’t it? Not surprisingly, there were a lot of similarities between the two, including prescribed expectations for exactly how the transaction between the couple would be conducted. (Nothing is ever that simple, Show me the Money).

It’s hard to believe that Jane Austen’s iconic proposal scene between Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Collins fit those expectations more or less exactly. But, seriously, it did.  Take a look.

Parental approval

In earlier centuries, a suitor applied first to the family before speaking with the woman herself. If her father or guardian did not approve, then the suitor dared not approach the woman herself. But in the Enlightened Regency era, such a course was outmoded. Modern society believed that young people had a right to choose their mates themselves—as long as their parents didn’t veto their choices afterwards, of course.

Until the age of twenty-one, both parties to a marriage required parental consent to marry. After that, parental approval was highly desirable, but not essential. Since a couple’s parents often contributed financially to their upkeep, keeping mom and dad happy was pretty important.

“But even where little or no property was at stake, parents of daughters (much more than sons) wanted to be consulted, especially when the daughter was still living at home, in part because they thought young women were ignorant and willful and could not be trusted to find a man with a good character and sufficient economic prospects.” (Shoemaker, 1998). For a child, son or daughter, to ignore the opportunity of making a grand alliance would have seemed foolhardy, not just to their family, but to their peers as well (Lewis, 1986).

Proposals

A gentleman who wished to propose—and it was only the gentleman who could extend an offer of marriage—had dubious advantage of having very clear procedures to follow. He did have some choices, though. He could offer a proposal in person or in the very formal form of a letter.

In either case, it was nearly impossible to conceal his intentions from his intended. An unengaged couple was never left alone, unless an offer of marriage was being made. Similarly, a man did not write to a woman he was not related to unless it was to make an offer. So either way, the lady could be fairly certain of what was coming.

In Pride and Prejudice, Mr. Collin’s proposal, though it makes the modern reader cringe and squirm a bit, contains all the hallmarks of a proper Regency era proposal.

“… but allow me to assure you that I have your respected mother's permission for this address…”

He secured parental approval.

“You can hardly doubt the purport of my discourse, however your natural delicacy may lead you to dissemble; my attentions have been too marked to be mistaken. Almost as soon as I entered the house I singled you out as the companion of my future life.”

He, as convention required, recognized her maidenly modesty—a proper woman would never be direct about her expectations or feelings—and treated it as a feminine virtue.

“Allow me, by the way, to observe, my fair cousin, that I do not reckon the notice and kindness of Lady Catherine de Bourgh as among the least of the advantages in my power to offer. … I am, to inherit this estate after the death of your honoured father (who, however, may live many years longer…” 

He established his credentials, including the means he could offer to support her and her future children.

“…it is usual with young ladies to reject the addresses of the man whom they secretly mean to accept, when he first applies for their favour; and that sometimes the refusal is repeated a second or even a third time. I am therefore by no means discouraged by what you have just said, and shall hope to lead you to the altar ere long.”

And he did not take her seriously when she refused him.

Rejected offers and jilts 

“According to the conventions of proposing, a man should express great doubt about the woman's answer, regardless of what he really felt about his probable reception. This would be a sign of respect, since it suggested that her charms were such that she could expect many worthy offers of marriage.” (Shapard, 2011).

While a young woman could refuse an offer of marriage—not really considered a good idea, mind you, but it was possible—she could easily acquire a reputation for being a jilt for doing so. In fact, both parties could be damaged by a refused offer of marriage, so matters were to be handled with the utmost delicacy and consideration for the feelings of the young man. Not only was it more ladylike to do so, it might mollify his dignity and prevent him from gossip that could taint her reputation. Thus, a rejection should begin as Elizabeth Bennet’s did, with reference to her consciousness of the honor being bestowed upon her by the gentleman in question.

“You forget that I have made no answer. Let me do it without farther loss of time. Accept my thanks for the compliment you are paying me, I am very sensible of the honour of your proposals, but it is impossible for me to do otherwise than decline them.”

This gentle approach to rejection also had the dubious advantage of making it easier for a suitor to propose a second time, as noted by Mr. Collins.

“When I do myself the honour of speaking to you next on this subject I shall hope to receive a more favourable answer than you have now given me; though I am far from accusing you of cruelty at present, because I know it to be the established custom of your sex to reject a man on the first application, and perhaps you have even now said as much to encourage my suit as would be consistent with the true delicacy of the female character.”

While being very civil, it did make it difficult to make one's true feelings clearly known. That was though in keeping with the general approach to courtship which largely kept feelings out of the conversation entirely.

Behavior during engagements

Once a couple became engaged, society expected them to act engaged. The couple might begin using each other’s Christian names. Letters and small gifts might be exchanged. A couple could express some degree of affection in public, dancing more than two dances together, for example.

Though her property would not yet be her husband’s, if a young woman did have property she should not dispose of it during her betrothal without her fiancé’s approval. Her transition to the legal state of coverture had begun (Show me the Money).

In general, engagements did not last very long, often only the three weeks required to call the banns or as long as it took to draw up marriage articles. Considering that according to church records (comparing marriage dates and dates of a couple’s first child’s birth) about one third of all Regency era couples went to the altar pregnant, short engagements were probably a good thing (Heydt-Stevenson, 2005).

References

Austen, Jane (1813). Pride and Prejudice.
Heydt-Stevenson, Jill (2005). Austen's Unbecoming Conjunctions: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lewis, Judith Schneid (1986). In the Family Way, Childbearing in the British Aristocracy, 1760-1860: Rutgers University Press.
Shapard, David M., ed. (2011).  The Annotated Sense and Sensibility: Anchor Books.
Shoemaker, Robert B. (1998).  Gender in English Society 1650-1850: Pearson Education Limited.

Find previous installments of this series here:

Get Me to the Church on Time: Changing Attitudes toward Marriage
To Have a Courtship, One Needs a Suitor
Nothing is ever that simple: Rules of Courtship
Show me the Money: the Business of Courtship
The Price of a Broken Heart

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

Though Maria Grace has been writing fiction since she was ten years old, those early efforts happily reside in a file drawer and are unlikely to see the light of day again, for which many are grateful. After penning five file-drawer novels in high school, she took a break from writing to pursue college and earn her doctorate. After 16 years of university teaching, she returned to her first love, fiction writing.

Click here to find her books on Amazon. For more on her writing and other Random Bits of Fascination, visit her website. You can also like her on Facebook, follow on Twitter or email 

The Price of a Broken Heart

by Maria Grace

Even after the decline of arranged marriages after 1780, marriage still remained largely a business transaction. Even the promise to marry was considered an enforceable contract, with a breach of promise suit a possible consequence of a broken engagement. Infringement on another man’s marriage ‘property’ could result in even more spectacular "crim con" cases and the award of greater damages.

Breach of Promise Suits

As early as the fifteenth century, English ecclesiastical courts equated a promise to marry with a legal marriage. By the 1600’s, this became part of common law; a contract claim one party could make upon another in civil court suits. (And you thought this was just the stuff of modern daytime television!)

To succeed in such a suit, the plaintiff, usually a woman, had to prove a promise to marry (or in some cases, the clear intention to offer such a promise), that the defendant breached the promise (or the implied promise to promise), and that the plaintiff suffered injury due to the broken promise (or failure to make the implied promise. Don’t think about it too hard, it’ll make your head hurt.)

Breach of Promise claims

A breach of promise suit required a valid betrothal. Promises to marry when both parties were below the age of consent were not valid. Similarly, promises to marry made when one was already married (as in I’ll marry you if/when my current spouse dies—how romantic!) or between those who could not legally marry were not enforceable.

If significant and material facts were discovered that could have influenced the agreement, then betrothal could be dissolved without penalty. So, issues like misrepresentation of one’s financial state, character, mental or physical capacity presented valid reasons to end an engagement.

If a betrothal was valid, a breach of promise claim could be presented in court. 

Reasoning

Why were such claims filed when it seems like it would be far easier, less painful and less embarrassing for a couple to simply go their separate ways? When a promise to marry was broken, the rejected party, usually female, suffered both social and economic losses.

Socially, an engaged couple was expected to act like an engaged couple. Though it seems unfair in modern eyes, the acceptable behaviors she may have shared with her betrothed, would leave her reputation damaged if he left her. Moreover, though premarital sex was officially frowned upon, it was known that a woman was much more likely to give up her virginity under a promise to marry. But if that promise was not kept, her future search for a husband would be significantly hampered for having broken the code of maidenly modesty.

The loss of reputation translated to serious economic losses, since middle and upper class women did not work outside the home and required a household supported by a husband’s wealth. A woman with a tarnished reputation was unlikely to marry well. 

Damage Awards

Perhaps as a result, a woman was far more likely to win a breach of promise claim than lose one. Middle-class ladies were generally able to obtain larger damage awards than working women, though cases varied greatly. About half of women winning damages obtained £50 - £200. (For reference, middle class family of four could live comfortably on £250 a year.)

While these awards could indeed offer assistance to wronged plaintiffs, the system was also ripe for abuse. Jurors were often unduly sympathetic toward jilted women, especially when they were attractive or portrayed as particularly virtuous. Damage awards could easily be swayed by such sympathies, making false claims very tempting. If all this sounds much like modern reality television, criminal conversation cases resemble it even more.

Criminal Conversation

During the late Georgian era, in England, sleeping with another man’s wife was not a legal offense. (Interestingly, it was in Scotland, though.) However a little detail like that could not stop cuckolded husbands from taking their wives’ adulterous lovers to court.

Since dueling over offenses of honor was increasingly frowned upon, gentlemen sought reparations in civil court. Civil laws concerning trespassing also addressed issues of ‘wounding another man’s property’. Since a wife was by law effectively chattel, a husband suffered damage to her chastity when adultery occurred, thus entitling him to financial compensation under civil law. If she ran off with her lover, the husband could also claim damages for the loss of her services as household manager. (Check the link below 'Show Me the Money' for more on a woman's legal position in marriage.)

The euphemistic name for the offense was Criminal Conversation (Crim Con.)

If a husband had evidence of adultery, he could launch a civil crim con case against the other man. Thus he might vindicate his own honor and destroy his rivals character and finances, all without the unsavory shedding of blood.

Interestingly, the wife was not a party to the suit, the matter was strictly between the men. (Remember the whole being property thing? That.)

Criminal Conversation trials

The last decade of the 18th century was by far the heyday for the crim con trial. Lord Chief Justice Lloyd Kenyon declared that the country was in the grip of a "crisis of morality"(Fullerton, 2004). Only after the average award settlements dropped in the early 19th century did the number of claims begin to decline. (Wonder if there’s a connection…)

In any case, crim con trials tended to be colorful, highly publicized events at the Court of the King's Bench, in a corner of Westminster Hall. These trials were open to the general public. And for those not fortunate enough to be able to attend in person, most book sellers carried newspaper, pamphlets, transcripts and ‘true’ exposés documenting all the sexual misadventures of high society.

Lawyers on both sides of the case played up the drama as much for the public notoriety as for the effect on the court’s decisions. They called servants, especially young pretty ones, to deliver testimony for both the plaintiff and the defense. While servants could be (mostly) excused for presenting salacious tales in similar language, the barristers were gentlemen and adopted notable euphemistic and flowery language to express the necessary elements with decency and taste. Some said it became something of an art form.

With so much at stake, both in terms of finances and reputations, truth and accuracy fell to the need to convince jurors.

The defendant, if he could not deny that he had seduced the plaintiff's wife, was obliged to present the object of his attentions as a low, debauched, corrupt woman who was worthless to the world let alone her sorry husband. The plaintiff, in order to secure a high payout, had to present his marriage as an unending festival of joyous love and his unfaithful wife as the best and most innocent woman in the world before the wicked seducer got his grubby hands on her. (Wilson, 2007). As a rule, these trials progressed quickly and once damages were assessed, they were enforceable like any other debt.

Damage Awards

In deciding damages, the jury had several factors to consider. The rank and fortune of the parties helped determine the loss the husband had suffered, effectively setting a cash value of the wife before her seduction. (As if the dowry and marriage settlements didn't do enough of that.) Juries also weighed the length of the marriage and the affair, whether the two men were friends before the seduction, and whether or not said seduction had taken place in the marital bed (an ever greater outrage and offense.) Often, juries wanted to insure that the well-heeled rake was sufficiently punished to deter more of his kind from following in his footsteps.

Juries often awarded only half the damages requested, so indignant gentlemen just increased the amount they asked for, often sums totaling over £15,000. Occasional cases were settled for up to £20,000 but awards of at least £1,500 were far more common.

Ironically, it was not unusual for a married couple to remain married after the conclusion of a crim con case. However, such a case was a preliminary step in divorce proceedings.

Divorce though required an act of Parliament. Seriously.

Reference

Fullerton, Susannah - Jane Austen & Crime JASA Press (2004)

Wilson, Ben - The Making of Victorian Values, Decency & Dissent in Britain: 1789-1837. The Penguin Press (2007)

Find previous installments of this series here:

Get Me to the Church on Time: Changing Attitudes toward Marriage
To Have a Courtship, One Needs a Suitor
Nothing is ever that simple: Rules of Courtship
Show me the Money: the Business of Courtship

References

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

Though Maria Grace has been writing fiction since she was ten years old, those early efforts happily reside in a file drawer and are unlikely to see the light of day again, for which many are grateful. After penning five file-drawer novels in high school, she took a break from writing to pursue college and earn her doctorate. After 16 years of university teaching, she returned to her first love, fiction writing.

Click here to find her books on Amazon. For more on her writing and other Random Bits of Fascination, visit her website. You can also like her on Facebook, follow on Twitter or email 

Show Me the Money: Marriage Settlements in the Regency Era

by Maria Grace

Even though the attitudes toward arranged marriages changed in the Regency era, and young people were, by and large, able to choose their own mates, marriage still remained largely a business proposition. Perhaps more significantly, a woman’s legal position changed dramatically at marriage, forever impacting her existence as a legal individual and making attendance to legal matters and paperwork essential for her future.

Women's Legal Position in Regency times

In 1765, William Blackstone presented a common man’s language interpretation of English law, which sets out the law’s approach to women’s legal existence and rights in marriage. These remained largely unchanged until the Married Women’s Property Act of 1884. Blackstone said:

By marriage, the husband and wife are one person in law: that is, the very being or legal existence of the woman is suspended during the marriage, or at least is incorporated and consolidated into that of the husband… and her condition during her marriage is called her coverture.
… For this reason, a man cannot grant anything to his wife, or enter into covenant with her: for the grant would be to suppose her separate existence; and to covenant with her, would be only to covenant with himself: … a husband may also bequeath any thing to his wife by will; for that cannot take effect till the coverture is determined by his death.
… the chief legal effects of marriage during the coverture; upon which we may observe, that even the disabilities which the wife lies under are for the most part intended for her protection and benefit: so great a favourite is the female sex of the laws of England.

Effectively this common law doctrine rendered married women unable to sign Bills of exchange, make contracts, buy property, write a will, act as a business partner, or even own her own earnings or have custody of her children. I’m not sure the law favored women the way Blackstone thought it did.

Ironically, single women and widows were able to act with much greater independence. In many cases widowhood gave a woman the greatest legal freedoms, which many wealthy widows were loath to give up by remarrying.

It was not until the Married Women’s Property Act of 1884 that married women the same legal rights as unmarried women.

Marriage Settlements

In most cases, women did not bring a great deal of property or money into a marriage (of course, neither did the husband). When there was substantial property involved, legal documents called marriage settlements or articles were required by one or both families.

Lawyers, one representing each family worked together to draw up a legal document know as a marriage settlement or marriage articles. Only about one tenth of marriages had them as the fee for such documents was around £100. (For reference, a family of four could live a comfortable middle class lifestyle on £250-300 a year.)

A marriage settlement was a prenuptial agreement (bet you thought that was a modern invention!) that established the financial terms of the marriage. The terms included stipulations about what was to be done with the wife’s dowry, what her discretionary income would be (known as ‘pin money’), what her income would if she became a widow, and what (total) amount would go to her children from the monies she brought into the marriage. The timing of these payments was also often specified.

Parents could also ‘settle’ money on the couple in the marriage articles. Jane Austen references this in Lydia’s settlement with Wickham in which Mr. Bennet is to allow her £100 per year during his lifetime.

A Woman’s Dowry

Though Jane Austen’s Mr. Bennet referred to dowries as bribes to worthless young men to marry his daughters, dowries were more commonly considered a means by which a responsible family compensated a husband for their daughter’s lifelong upkeep. Thus, a woman’s birth family was responsible for seeing that she could maintain the lifestyle to which she was accustomed once she was married.

Dowries (or more commonly the interest earned off a dowry) provided a woman’s lifetime spending money, her income if she became a widow, and money for her children at the death of one or both parents. Settlements would specify a total amount of money set aside for daughter’s dowries. The more daughters a family had, the more ways the sum would have to be divided. The division of the money was generally not specified, so it did not have to be divided evenly amongst the daughters. A father might add to the sum during his lifetime, but if not stipulated in the settlement, it was not required.

There was no guarantee that a woman’s family would have the cash on hand to pay a dowry on marriage. Often time, that sum was tied up in estate capital or investments. The family might have to take out a mortgage to pay the dowry, or a down payment on it, with the final portion due from the estate at the father’s death.

To replenish the loss of capital, the heir of the estate needed to marry a bride with her own fortune. Marrying a woman without sufficient capital could harm the financial position of the family estate.

Pin Money

Pin money, a woman’s disposable income, was stipulated in the marriage settlement. It represented money she could spend without answering to her husband. Since common law only stipulated that a man had to provide his wife’s ‘necessities’, pin money could supply the ‘luxuries’ that might be required to live the life style to which her family accustomed her.

The concept makes a great deal of sense, but since only a small minority of women enjoyed marriage settlements, most probably did not enjoy the luxury of their own private allowance to be spent as they wished.

Jointure

Common law did not allow for joint property ownership as we know it today. Upon a husband’s death, his estate and other property did not automatically become his wife’s. Typically the estate would be settled upon his heir, the widow would only receive what was willed her by the husband and what was set aside in her jointure. If a man left his wife property, it might be marked with the stipulation that it would revert to his heir or another designate if she remarried.

A jointure was the typical means of provision for a man’s widow, usually anchored on the amount that a woman brought into a marriage. Generally it was an annuity equal to one tenth of a woman’s dowry. The annuity would be payable by the heir of a man’s estate until the woman’s death upon which the principle would descend to her children. The ratio of jointure to dowry was established by the idea that the average wife would outlive her husband by about ten years. Thus, she would most likely receive back the amount she brought into the marriage over the duration of her widowhood.

Marriage Settlements to the Children

Marriage settlements also stipulated provisions for a woman’s children. Special provisions for children from a prior marriage would be included to insure that they received portions from their father’s property if it was in their mother’s hands at the time of her remarriage. If a man were widowed, these same provisions protected a first wife’s children from losing their mother’s fortune to a subsequent wife’s machinations, though it might also limit what a father could pass down to children from subsequent wives. This was the salient plot point for Jane Austen’s Sense and Sensibility.

The monies a woman brought into the marriage through her dowry and any other settlements on her, would go to her children, both sons and daughters, upon her death. Additional funds could be settled on the children from the father’s estate. The marriage articles would stipulate the amounts. Typically, only the total amounts would be set forth in the settlement, not the division among the children. This made sense given there was no way to know ahead of time how many children of which gender would be born. One consequence, though, was that a parent might threaten to readjust the division of the funds in order to control the behavior of a child set on thwarting his or her parent’s wishes.

While all these documents and legal requirements make for great plot points in fiction, few actually obtained them. These matters were mainly the purview of the landed and wealthy who made up the top ten percent or so of the population. Most women would have been happy with a dowry of a few hundred pounds; most children did not inherit vast sums or property from their parents; and most widows had to rely on their children and other family for support.

Find previous installments of this series here:

Get Me to the Church on Time: Changing Attitudes toward Marriage
To Have a Courtship, One Needs a Suitor
Nothing is ever that simple: Rules of Courtship

References

William Blackstone. Commentaries on the Laws of England. Vol, 1 (1765), pages 442-445.

Dr Amy Erickson, Women and property in early modern England (1993)

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

Though Maria Grace has been writing fiction since she was ten years old, those early efforts happily reside in a file drawer and are unlikely to see the light of day again, for which many are grateful. After penning five file-drawer novels in high school, she took a break from writing to pursue college and earn her doctorate. After 16 years of university teaching, she returned to her first love, fiction writing.

Click here to find her books on Amazon. For more on her writing and other Random Bits of Fascination, visit her website. You can also like her on Facebook, follow on Twitter or email

Nothing is Ever that Simple: Rules of Courtship

1805-courtship-caricature (public domain: Wikipedia)

by Maria Grace

In previous centuries that relied upon arranged marriages, courtship was more a seducer’s art. But at the dawn of the 19th century, it became the road leading to matrimony. Conduct literature proliferated in response to the new anxieties and uncertainties of finding a proper mate. Since young people now enjoyed a degree of choice over their marriage partner, they needed advice on how to judge character, how to behave in public toward the opposite sex, how to attract the opposite sex, even the proper way to make or refuse an offer of marriage.

Thus, strict rules for behavior during courtship developed. The rules safeguarded both sexes. Gentlemen required protection from being trapped into matrimony, and ladies needed to be guarded from becoming attached to men who were not sincere in their intentions toward them.

Initiating a Courtship

Courtship and marriage were serious steps for middle class men and women, usually not embarked upon until their middle to late twenties. Young men were counseled not to embark upon it lightly, and young women not to give affections too easily.

I cannot even understand how it is flattering to a man's vanity, to gain the affections of a deserving and too credulous woman, whom he never intends to marry. He ought to lose more in his character for integrity, than he can gain as one successful in courtship. His manner of address, consisting of a visible attachment. While his heart is not engaged, is most detestable hypocrisy. And to say that he is not bound in honour, because he has subjected himself to no specific promise, is the highest aggravation of his guilt. Were he to act in the same manner in his common transactions with mankind, his character would be forever blasted. (Gener, 1812)

A woman is often placed in a very delicate situation. She may be distinguished by a kind of attention which is calculated to gain her affections, while it is impossible to know whether the addresses of her pretended lover will end in a serious declaration. (Gener, 1812)

As in most things in society in that era, men played the active role in the prescribed procedure for proper courtship. Moreover, “the scarcity value of men in Jane Austen's lifetime, together with women's dependence on husbands for status and financial security, gave eligible bachelors the power to act as connoisseurs.” (Jones, 2009)

Women had to wait for pursuit by a suitor. Siblings and friends could be recruited as messengers to alert a potential suitor of a young lady’s inclinations, but she could take no further initiative. Even if a suitor made the first move, she was expected to behave with considerable reserve and not openly encourage a man’s suit.

ONE of the chief beauties in a female character is that modest reserve, that retiring delicacy, which avoids the public eye, and is disconcerted even at the gaze of admiration. (Gregory, 1774)

Ironically, the one area in courtship where the lady might have an active role was in refusing unwanted attentions. This restricted her choices from among those who made advances toward her. It was not uncommon for a woman to feel pressured to accept the first reasonable offer they received, since another might never come their way.

A woman’s sterling reputation enhanced her value in the marriage market and increased the likelihood of receiving the attention of eligible young men. Thus, an etiquette of courtship developed to help guard against impropriety of any kind that could damage her reputation.

Discretion in all things

For the Gentleman

Those marriages generally abound most with love and constancy, that are preceded by long courtship. The passion should strike root, and gather strength before marriage be grafted on it. A long course of hopes and expectations fixes the idea in our minds, and habituates us to a fondness of the person beloved…(The Young Husband's Book 1839.)

In Harmony before Matrimony (1805), James Gillray caricatured a courtship in which the couple sings together from Duets de l'Amour. (Photo credit: James Gillray [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons)

Unmarried men had to exercise caution around unmarried young ladies. Attentions or worse, particular friendliness, might be interpreted as romantic interest by the lady herself or her friends and family. Since men were not to express interest unless they were serious about a woman, misunderstood actions could lead to accusations of intentionally leading a woman on. Pressure to offer marriage might follow.

For the Lady

The Advantages of being reserved are too many to be set down; we will only say, that it is a Guard to a good Woman, and a Disguise to an ill One. It is of so much Use to both, that those ought to use it as an Artifice who refuse to practice it as a Virtue. (The Whole Duty of a Woman, 1737)

Female conduct manuals universally cautioned women not to be forward in their dealings with men or to encourage their advances. A woman must never confess her feelings until absolutely convinced of his intentions. Some went so far as to insist a woman must never look at a man unless he made the first advance. Not surprisingly, it was difficult for either party to truly discern the feelings and intentions of the other. Only at the moment an offer of marriage was made could a man declare his feelings and a woman her own in return.

Do’s and Do Nots of Courtship

Strict rules of behavior governed courtship. If a couple was observed violating any of them, onlookers would immediately assume a proposal had been offered and accepted. Even mild displays of friendliness could inspire speculations about a possible offer of marriage.

A great many behaviors were prohibited to a young couple prior to betrothal. These prohibitions included: using Christian names, paying compliments, driving in carriages alone together, correspondence, and any kind of intimate touching.

Chaperones

Young women were protected zealously in company. Young, unmarried women were never alone in the company of a gentleman, save family and close family friends. A chaperone was also required for a young single woman to attend any social occasion. Under no circumstances could a lady call upon a gentleman alone unless consulting him on business matters, and she never forced herself upon a man's notice.

Except for a walk to church or a park in the early morning, a lady could not walk alone. She always needed to be accompanied by another lady, an appropriate man, or a servant. Though a lady was permitted to drive her own carriage, if she left the family estate, she required the attendance of a groom. Similarly, on horseback she needed an appropriate companion to protect her reputation.

Conversation

Since the courting couple could never be truly alone, the best they could hope for was to be out of earshot of the other people present. Conversations had to be extremely discreet leaving much to be interpreted from facial expressions alone. Even those were proscribed by many writers.

There is another Character not quite so criminal, yet not less ridiculous; which is, that of a good humour'd Woman, one who thinketh me must always be in a Laugh, or a broad Smile, because Good-Humour is an obliging Quality; thinks it less ill Manners to talk impertinently than to be silent in Company. (The Whole Duty of a Woman, 1737)

Touch

All forms of touching were kept to a minimum. Putting a lady's shawl about her shoulders, or assisting her to mount a horse, enter a carriage or climb stairs were acceptable. A gentleman might take a lady's arm through his, to support her while out walking. But he must never try to take her hand. If he did, she must immediately withdraw it with a strong air of disapproval, whether she felt it or not. Even shaking hands was frowned upon.

Gifts

Although letters could not be exchanged by unmarried couples, surprisingly, some gifts were entirely acceptable. A young man could send a posey or a fan to a young lady, perhaps to be carried at an event like a ball. He might send treats like out of season fruits or sweets. However, a woman could not receive a miniature from an unrelated man unless she was engaged to him.

Once engaged, couples were expected to proclaim that fact clearly, in part ensuring that neither could back out without serious social repercussions. The serious matter of betrothals and the business that accompanied them will be the focus of the next installment of this series.

Find previous installments here:

Get Me to the Church on Time: Changing Attitudes toward Marriage
To Have a Courtship, One Needs a Suitor

References

Gener, S., and John Muckersy. M. Gener, Or, A Selection of Letters on Life and Manners. 3rd ed. Edinburgh: Printed for Peter Hill ..., A. Constable & and A. MacKay ;, 1812.

Gregory, John. A Father's Legacy to His Daughters By the Late Dr. Gregory, of Edinburgh. The 2nd ed. London: Printed for W. Strahan ;, 1774.

Jones, Hazel. Jane Austen and Marriage. London: Continuum, 2009.

The Whole Duty of a Woman, Or, an Infallible Guide to the Fair Sex. Containing, Rules, Directions, and Observations, for Their Conduct and Behaviour through All Ages and Circumstances of Life, as Virgins, Wives, or Widows. With Directions, How to Obtain All Use. The 2nd ed. London: Printed for T. Read, in Dogwell-Court, White-Fryers, Fleet-Street, 1737.

The Young Husband's Book a Manual of the Duties, Moral, Religious, and Domestic, Imposed by the Relations of Married Life. Philadelphia: Lea & Blanchard, 1839.

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~

 Maria Grace is the author of Darcy's Decision,  The Future Mrs. Darcy, All the Appearance of Goodness, and Twelfth Night at Longbourn, Remember the Past, and Mistaking Her Character.  Click here to find her books on Amazon. For more on her writing and other Random Bits of Fascination, visit her website. You can also like her on Facebook, follow on Twitter or email her.