A Much maligned Man

Many times when reading non fiction and supposed biographies by lauded historians and famous authors, I ponder how far they truly researched their subject matter, and why they chose to perpetuate what was writ before as though their own writings are mere carbon copies of former works! Thus I find it incredibly difficult to write on any subject and avoid overwhelming impassioned desire to uncover truths from lies and look at supposed infamy with a detective mindset - after all, it's easy to read others' works and judge which best suits one's ideal of the past and events of the day - in other words - biased leanings in a political sense relevant to self in one's own time as opposed to non partisan leanings, similarly in moral tones. 

Hence, here I attempt to redeem the reputation of a  much maligned man subject to envy of his service in the Dutch regiment of Holland (The Buffs) whilst on campaign with Charles II, and their close covert connection, and why fear within another cabal, namely James II's followers (Catholic conspirators), essentially set out to defame Robert and his cousin Lucy Walter/s by false declarations, scandalous rumours, and falsification of papers/dates/other to prove he was the father of James Duke of Monmouth. But of course, since then DNA samples have proved the Duke of Monmouth was indeed Charles II's son.  So was handsome Robert a cad of the first order or a true gentleman and loyal family friend to a much maligned lady cousin?      

Robert Sydney (1626-1668) 4th son - 2nd Earl of Leicester

buried at Penshurst Place

Throughout his service in the Low Countries Robert was maligned by leading chroniclers of his day - not least accusations he and his elder brother Algernon had shared the Duke of Monmouth's mother. Robert was also marked as a spy for Cromwell, his brother Algernon a staunch Parliamentarian and true Protestant. Was Robert a double agent, or did that cap fit Col Thomas Howard (Master of the Horse to Mary of Orange) - another wonderful character to place within the hands of a person with a detective mind set, for he too was in Cromwell's pay!  

What is never disclosed is the family connection of the Sydney family to Lucy Walter, nor is it ever disclosed that Lucy was a 7th cousin removed from Charles II. Considering John Evelyn's scathing comments about Lucy as "a woman of mean birth" he clearly knew nothing of her family connection to the Howard family (Duke's of Norfolk) via Catherine Howard.

Strange as it may seem, the movements of Lucy Walter and the fact she was in Paris long before she arrived in The Hague never appears in biographies, nor do chroniclers (Evelyn's Diaries) mention Lord Glamorgan (Lucy's uncle) and Mr. Barlow/oe, Lucy's uncle, as taking passage aboard "named" ship that anchored off Jersey to there join with Charles II  - thus after the defeat of the King Charles I armies, the Prince of Wales sought shelter first on the Isles of Scilly, then took flight to Jersey April-June 1646. When Charles moved to Paris, Sir Edward Hyde remained on Jersey for two more years, and therefore was not in Paris to witness Lucy and Charles second marriage ceremony, (legal or otherwise and much talk on the event). Rarely is Hyde's residency on Jersey mentioned. In that same year of 1646 Lord Glamorgan was dispatched to Ireland on a second sortie to raise a Catholic Army in support of Charles I (another story).

Nor do official chroniclers record Lucy and Lord Glamorgan when put ashore on Jersey, whilst Mr. Balow/oe of Slebech, Pembrokeshire, proceeded onward to The Hague. A Mr. Barlow disembarked at The Hague with a letter destined for Charles II's sister - Mary of Orange.     

Algernon Sydney - (1623-1683) tried for Treason (Rye House Plot)

Algernon was equally maligned as having taken Lucy as his mistress, which according to family writings he never did, but did indeed rescue her during a raid in which he was commander of operations on a house in Devon (Brock House) demolished in the reign of James II post Monmouth Rebellion.  Brock House is where Charles II (then Prince of Wales) was hiding prior to sudden flight to the Scilly Isles. Had news not arrived of Parliamentarian forces en route to arrest him, who can say what the result would have been. Someone, but who, had tipped off the royal party? Either way, it was a mad scramble to get out to sea, and Lucy and others were at the house, the owner her uncle, family to her mother. 

All that is official re Parliamentarian Army records, is that Lucy was escorted back to London along with her mother and siblings, whilst others were arrested for harbouring the prince. Bear in mind Lucy already had a brother serving in the Parliamentarian Army - Richard Walter who became High Sheriff of Pembrokeshire during the Interregnum. Lucy never set sail for The Hague - no warrant to travel overseas was ever issued nor a named ship's passage. What she did do was retreat to Wales (Roche Castle) to her father, (did her mother approve?) and once there plans were put into action to get her to Jersey, or perhaps plans were already set in motion. Was it possible Lucy was recruited as a spy for Parliament in the first instance, and could it be, Lucy fell in love with Charles? If the former bears any sense of possibility, was it she who revealed evidence of Colonel Thomas Howard (Master of the Horse to Mary of Orange) as a traitor to the royalist cause - in the pay of Parliament, and was he the mysterious "Walter" sending coded messages to Thurloe?  It would account for why he escaped imprisonment when Lucy and Robert Sydney were arrested shortly after her return to London with her two children, even though Col Thomas Howard travelled with them? Which of the two men was sent by Charles to guard Lucy and the children, and why would she and the children be received and treated as royalty by loyal royalists who were covertly raising and providing funds for Charles cause?         

The Rye House 

But back to Robert - the handsome and dashing blade! He continued to serve in the Low Countries as an English officer of an English regiment after Charles II was restored to the crown 1660.  

But come the disbandment of the Regiments in Holland -1665, the Dutch authorities decided to honourably discharge the English and Scots troops serving in the regiments and replace them with Netherlanders. Those Englishmen and Scotsmen who were prepared to swear the oath of allegiance to The Dutch republic were re-admitted into the regiments. The discharged officers and men were given no assistance from the English government for their repatriation, which the better off in society could afford inclusive much loved horses. For the others Sir George Downing, British Envoy, paid for their passage to England and gave them letters of recommendation.

The 3 Scots regiments were converted into 3 nominally Dutch regiments and the 4 English regiments were replaced by only one Dutch regiment. Those English officers who remained in Holland were placed in the 3 former Scots regiments. 'The States General, on 14th April, ordered that all the transformed English and Scottish companies, now of service within the Netherlands companies, thus drums would thereafter beat the Holland March on guard mounting, and on all other occasions. The sashes and badges of the officers were then orange-coloured, similar to those worn by the Dutch officers, and green coats.'

In England:

Charles II's Change of Heart, or should that be shamed by the officers who also assisted common soldiers with transport to home shores!  

And so, in 1665 the discharged officers and men began to arrive back in England and the King was more or less advised to reconsider the question of reinstating some or all of the soldiers for service to King and Crown. Subsequently, a list was compiled, dated 11th April 1665. 

All in all 17 subalterns arrived along with officers. Clearly all loyal to the English crown. Thus, on the 20th April a warrant was issued to reinstate said men into the King's pay at a reduced rate, 3 shillings a day for lieutenants and 2 shillings and sixpence for ensigns. Captains were given 5 shillings a day.

The Appointment of Col Robert Sydney, 31st May 1665, raised a few eyebrows, but many were unaware of Robert's covert closeness to Charles (spy extraordinaire).

The King had the officers and men formed into a regiment and issued a commission to Colonel Robert Sydney to be 'Colonell of Our Holland Regiment of Foot, raised or to be raised, for Our service.' 

Hardly surprising as Robert Sydney (Sidney), had commanded one of the English regiments in the Dutch service, and was 4th son of Robert 2nd Earl of Leicester.  He was as stated a handsome man and many thought due to scurrilous rumours put about by John Evelyn, Killigrew, James Duke of York and Col Thomas Howard, he was the real father of the Duke of Monmouth. (The reasons for this assumption were that Robert's mistress was at one time the King's mistresses/wife (?), I'll not venture farther into the rumours because it's a story in itself, and it comes to light a great deal within my English Civil War series of novels - The Royal Series! 

In brief it was said Lucy Walter/s (aka Mrs Barlow), and Charles II's son Duke of Monmouth, so closely resembled Robert (Sydney) he must be the father, but the fact most ignored or purposefully attempted to mask, was the truth that Robert and Lucy were cousins!   

Aside from which, it is most unlikely Charles II would have asked Robert Sydney to raise a new Hollander regiment, if he thought for one moment his first born (James Duke of Monmouth) was the other man's child. Nor would Charles have ever treated the DoM as a prince of the blood, as did - oddly enough - Queen Henrietta Maria, an act neither applied to other of Charles' bastards. 

The reinstatement of  Holland Regiment, 23rd June 1665

The official date of the raising of the Holland Regiment for His Majesty's service was the 31st May 1665 the day Colonel Robert Sydney's commission was confirmed, but the other officers received their commissions 3 weeks later on 23rd June. The 21 officers included Major Alexander Bruce who was the only officer of the Scots regiments to refuse the oath of allegiance to the Netherlands. Thus the regiment was fixed at 6 companies of 106 NCOs. Field officers acted as captains to the first 3 companies. 

The 1st Company had Colonel Sydney as captain, a lieutenant, an ensign, 2 sergeants, 3 corporals, one drummer and 100 private soldiers.

The 2nd Company was commanded by Lt-Col Thomas Howard - another spy extraordinaire (double agent) during the ECWs, and Master of the Horse to Princess Mary, wife/widow Prince William of Nassau.   

The 3rd Company by Major Alexander Bruce, 

The 4th Company by Capt Sir Thomas Ogle

The 5th Company by Capt Henry Pomeroy

The 6th Company by Capt Baptist Alcock

All the officers in the regiment had served in the English-Dutch regiments except the surgeon. The very fact all the officers and the returned men had refused to take the oath in Holland they were in effect out of commission kicking their heels in civvy street. Nonetheless, their loyalty to the English crown had been proved. 

In the meanwhile the Duke of York and Albany's Maritime Regiment of Foot (The Lord High Admiral's Regiment), had been raised the previous autumn. It was decided the Holland Regiment, would primarily serve at sea as a maritime/land unit - effectively Marines! On the 11th July the cost of these two regiments was ordered to be charged to the Navy. And the Holland Regiment remained on the naval establishment until May 1667.

    

All the above is accumulated research across many years of study into this period in history, a fascinating period of political turbulence, religious intolerance, social change, and last but not least, royal shenanigans involving treachery, jealousy, hatred, revenge, and lust and romance. 

To cite all my sources would entail a list an arms length in respect of 50 yrs of studying history, and still new things come to light as private papers, ecclesiastical and state papers are discovered within national or private archives and placed within the public domain! Though many personal family archives contributed to the writing of The Royal Series. 

   

Jane Austen's Meryton - where was it?

Before I pose the theory Jane Austen did as many authors do today, and indeed shuffled the location of Meryton and Longbourn, thus placing it a county removed, she probably did so out of politesse to relatives and friends. After all, she had numerous connections within Berkshire, not least the Leigh side of the family. She also attended a boarding school in Reading, which was markedly different than Reading of today. She no doubt made friends, some better liked than others, a quite natural consequence of boarding establishments. It was known she was fond of Windsor and Wargrave, and Windsor itself was markedly different in her day. It was much smaller and rural in extremes, aside from the castle, as were other well known market towns and villages once situated outside London and now part of Greater London. Jane was an intrepid traveller as can be seen from reading her letters, and the distance between Reading, Wargrave, and Windsor pretty much traverses Berkshire. So with that in mind, hold that thought...   

This water colour of Jane Austen was painted by her sister, Cassandra. That much we do know!

But, there are several portraits purportedly that of Jane Austen, and not one of those portraits can truly be verified with absolute surety they are that of Jane Austen. I suppose desire to see the lady's face probably inspired artists to create impressions from descriptions, and while it may seem odd to us that there is no definitive record or extensive collection of Austen family portraits thus depicting Jane and Cassandra, one has to remember portraits were jolly expensive items in her day.       

Nonetheless she has become the most admired lady authoress of contemporary fiction - yes contemporary novels set within, and penned within her own lifetime. One can only ponder what Jane would have felt if she had become as popular in her own lifetime as has been her latter literary fortune since the mid 20th century and now into the 21st century, therefore, does not the word "ecstatic" leap to mind?   

Press images to see full size.

The original Lambourne House had Stuart connections - so what did Jane think of it? 

Now to the teaser questions that have puzzled Jane Austen fans for simply ages:

a) where is Meryton and where is Longbourn situated? 

b) was it wholly fictional, or did such a place exist in her time? 

c) did she change the name to disguise the places mentioned

This is a house once situated near Bath but no longer exists, and it was two counties distant to Berkshire, but Jane probably looked upon it with some regularity when passing by on her way to or from Bath. So much of old England is gone, the landscape changed from the days of the Georgian period, but as authors today search for houses and interiors suitable for depicting the lifestyle of fictional characters, Jane probably utilised those of which she was already familiar, or those she could only admire from a distance but readily suited to her fictional families.    

Rather than beat round bushes and lengthen suspension, or mayhap stir disbelief, I'll come out and say it, for I believe she pulled the same stunt as I do within my novels. by locating houses in differing places and changing the names. 

Is it not likely Jane Austen swapped the setting of Longbourn from Berkshire to Hertfordshire, thus she protected the occupants of the house she had used as inspiration for Longbourn. She had family connections within Berkshire, knew it extremely well. Perhaps mini anagrams exist and one day a clever person will unravel a puzzle Jane posed as a teaser game - find Meryton you'll discover Longbourn, or vice versa.     

Windsor was estimated at 24 miles + from London in Jane's time ,  and Jane was not only acquainted with Windsor (fond of it and the castle), she had resided in Reading as a boarder (school), and stayed in Wargrave, all three places on several main coaching routes to Bath, Gloucester, and Holyhead. Her family connections in the county cannot be denied. Aside from which, numerous country houses and estate parkland she would have seen and probably paid visit to on occasion, many vanished (demolished) to make way for modern  rebuilds or municipal housing in later times, plus modern post WWII housing estates were built in and around original parkland and grounds of former glorious houses, often the original estate's name then utilised for road names in like to example: Manor Hill Drive, Manor Hill Crescent, Manor Hill Terrace.      

Add the extra snippets, how at fifteen years of age she wrote an account of history. It was a tad satirical and amusing, but she revealed a great and abiding interest and affection for the Stuarts - Mary Queen of Scots to Charles I and presumably to the remainder of the Stuart era. Could she therefore be deemed a Royalist sympathiser or was her interest nothing more than general observance of those troubling times? We shall never know, but the tragedy of the French Revolution and the guillotine impacted on the Austen's in a personal sense. And her immediate family were later affected by the Napoleonic wars as were no doubt others of her acquaintance and theirs. No wonder then she chose to pen escapist writing, of a lighthearted and amusing bent, not only to escape the dreadful realities of the war dead and the returning wounded, there was always the constant fear great loss could befall the family all over again.        

Might that sense of knowing Berkshire too well set Jane to sage thought of exchanging one county for another? Could it be Meryton and Longbourn reflect places she knew within Berkshire? No one can know for sure, but it adds a new dimension in the search for both places, and perhaps a county distant for the fictional setting eased her conscience in writing of places she knew inside and out! 

Goodnestone Park Manor, Kent, the very house and family Jane Austen's brother married into. 

Here's another thought on Rosings and Pemberley, for Goodnestone Park Manor House was built in 1704 by Brook Bridges. It is accepted as fact the house build was started in 1704 because a brick on the main front declares it thus. We also know from early paintings there were extensive formal gardens, which were redesigned in the 19th century when Sir Brook Bridges, the 3rd baronet and great-grandson of the builder, replaced the gardens with a landscape parkland setting in the fashion of the time, later turned back to smaller contained gardens. He married Fanny Fowler, co-heiress of the ancient Norman barony of FitzWalter, though it was much depleted by the 19th century. In earlier times a Fitzwalter was one of the men who forced King John to sign the Magna Carta in 1215. The FitzWalters were renowned as courtiers (politicians too) and became Earls of Sussex with many cadet branches of the family. 

But back to J. Austen, for Brook and Fanny's daughter, Elizabeth, married Edward Austen, Jane Austen's brother, thus the pair's early married life was conducted at Goodnestone estate within the family fold until they removed to nearby Godmersham Park. There is a strange circumstance related to Edward Austen, for why did the Knight family adopt Edward from the Austen's and to later inherit the estate he had to change his name to Austen-Knight.  

Needless to say, Jane was a regular guest at Goodnestone in the early days of her brother's marriage. A significant factor therefore is that Jane began writing her first novel, Pride and Prejudice, immediately after staying at Goodnestone Park in 1796.

Did Jane utilise Goodnestone as Rosings, and Godmersham Park as Pemberley?  

Godmersham

She probably knew Brook Bridges (extremely wealthy) had bankrolled the marriage to Fanny by loans afforded to the ailing Fitzwalter estate. 

And of course Darcy's mother, Lady Anne Darcy and her sister Lady Catherine de Bourgh, were "Fitzwilliams"! We know the fictional Fitzwilliam (colonel Fitzwilliam) and the earldom had fallen short in monetary quarters, i.e. the estate was run down as was the Fitzwalter estate. 

Hence Jane, again, no doubt set Pemberley in Derbyshire to allay any connection with houses she was indeed familiar. Added to which she does indeed say Elizabeth and the Gardiners ventured to great houses of Derbyshire, not least that of Chatsworth.

The truth of the matter, it's a little sad how TV dramas and Movies have effectively provided Mr. Darcy with houses he could only dream of. 

The Duke of Devonshire's income was £35,000 from his estate at Chatsworth, copper mines and coal mines. 

The following two pictures are houses that were featured as that of Pemberley within TV dramas, namely:

Chatsworth.

Dyrham Park too provided an income of 20, 000 + from 250 acres and business interests. Twice Darcy's income. 

Dyrham Park

Both Chatsworth and Dyrham are almost as large as Blenheim Palace, the seat of the Duke's of Marlborough, and all well in excess of Darcy's  Regency era income.

Blenheim Palace.    

Food for thought, what say you, in how Jane Austen rarely if ever ventures to great detail on houses and fashions etc., and here's a little teaser: 

Jane began writing Pride and  Prejudice in 1796 and it was first published in 1813. It is said PP is set in 1812, so did the publisher, as they're of wont today, suggest she update it to a later time-frame, because it was completed long before its publication day.  Remember Jane lived through the years of the French Revolution 1789-1799.

After all, two of her brothers were naval officers and both were involved in action at sea. Jane had a cousin, the Comtesse Elizabeth de Feullide, Elizabeth sought sanctuary back in the family fold when her husband the Compte went to the guillotine. Elizabeth later married Henry Austen, and no doubt this is why Jane sought escape from the horrors of reality. In retrospect her novels are not a true depiction of her day despite her social awareness and collective impressions of wealth Vs poverty and bettering one's prospects. She did indeed gloss and paint a picture of rural delights with happy carefree picnics, soirees and much dancing as though the country was not at war with France and in 1812, America.  

   

Knowing the French nobility and aristocracy!

Louis XIV - The Sun King

With recent TV series' and movies depicting the differing reigns at the French Court, from the action adventures of The Three Musketeers, the Palace of the Louvre, other, to the glories of Versailles, all have graced our screens from the reign of Louis XIV’s father, to the sun king himself. We've thrilled and chilled to the realities of ambitious courtiers to the blood curdling reality of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic era. Thus novels with French settings are becoming popular within the historical romance genre. But, when writing historical romance novels set within France, whether in the feudal 13^th century, the years of Louis XIV (the sun king), or later post French Revolution, there are aspects of the aristocracy across the centuries that has changed, as did the hierarchy of the nobles. Even knowing the difference between “Noblesse militaire” (of the Sword – granted for military prowess) and “Noblesse d’épée” (of the Robe – granted for service or relationship to the royal household) is vital in depiction of an aristocratic family.

Versailles the Series. 

The king, and his brother, Monsieur le duc d'Orleans. 

In short, it helps to know one’s history, and helps even more in understanding the French aristocracy and it’s lineage, so in summary:

Titles in the French aristocracy:

duc (duke)

marquis (marquis)

comte (earl)

vicomte (viscount)

baron (baron)

Chevalier (knight)and écuyer (rider)  were not titles.

They were merely ranks within the lower realms of the nobility, with a few exceptions, namely members of the knighthood of the king. All lesser noblemen no matter how recent in elevation to noble status were referred to as écuyer (rider).

Chevalier de Lorraine

A popular character in the series Versailles. 

The definition of a chevalier, in legal terms, was unclear for centuries. For some it was a matter of ancestry or a matter of eminence. It was found that legal documents, those whose nobility traced to 1410 or earlier – they were referred to as haut et puissant seigneur, while those whose families were connected by marriage to the royal house were très haut et très puissant seigneur. But, by Louis XIV the sun king’s reign, after the Baron’s Revolt, Noblesse militaire was considered of lesser nobility by the Noblesse d’épée - the latter with secure royal ties, either by blood or by marriage to members of the royal household.

It is worth noting "chevalier" was also used to refer to French Knights within the “Order of Saint John” (Order of Malta) as well as those within the French royal court: the use of the term makes it similar to a title such as monsieur le chevalier d'Lorraine - though not so; for it simply indicated membership in such an order, in general for younger sons of the nobility.

Lord (seigneur) was not a title, either. A lordship could be that of mere commoner and owner of land and property, inclusive tenanted property holdings. The term "lord" in the feudal system was a mixture of actual real estate and rights over people - rents and fees collected from them, certain obligations could be imposed on them. All lordships and the majority of aristocratic titles were abolished in 1789, until Napoleon became emperor and established a new common realm of aristocracy befitting his reign.

Forms of address at the French court of Louis XIV -when the “Church of France” came to fruition by Louis’ edict and his rebellion against the Vatican, thus the old feudal Seigneur of the former barons and knights was dropped in favour of Monsieur by aristocrats seeking closer favour with Louis. It was a direct kickback at the Holy Roman Church.

Monsieur le duc (duke)

Monsieur le marquis (marquis)

Monsieur le comte (earl)

Monsieur le vicomte (viscount)

Monsieur le baron (baron)

Monsieur le Chevalier (knight)

Forms of Address Prior to Louis XIV

Seigneur .........

As would be expected each fief, landed title bore more weight than mere lordly title in the days of the old barons: large or small. And yet, post the Baron’s Revolt, many great châteaux and the occasional castle soon fell into disrepair when they were not sequestered by the crown and awarded to newly titled favourites of the French court. But as courtiers were expected to reside within the walls of Versailles and attend upon the king – as and when, often their estates were badly neglected or merely mothballed within the hands of trusted retainers and a handful of minions.

Latest Release set during the City of Bath's Georgian Creation!

A little about my latest release! It's a novel I have become very fond of due to an ancestor of Francis Cavendish's, who held a special place in my heart when writing a series of novels set within the English Civil Wars. 

This is Francis Cavendish the hero! 

He was 18 yrs and newly returned from War when his portrait was painted. 

There is a heavily masked element within this image, and Francis is fortunate that men indeed wear facial powder (some theatrical paste) as well as powdered wigs in his lifetime. But when he rebels and sheds his false appearance reality strikes a cruel blow, at a time when vanity and perfection all things were uppermost. Thus his story begins when he's in his twenties and deep-seated hurt caused by one woman's cruel words haunt him, until he encounters Cassandra Brooke-Lavery. 

Whilst the Georgian era itself is looked upon as glorious period in history, in which ladies wore beautiful gowns, and gentlemen equally wore flamboyant attire, it was also a time of industrious architectural energy with the revival of great and ambitious building projects not seen since earlier times in Stuart England, when the rebuilding of London after the Great Fire of London was set out with plans Charles II approved with fervour. 

But, if one looks at houses built during the Stuart era, the resemblance of many Stately Homes such as Blenheim  Palace, Wilton House, and others, one can see reflections of those builds within the Georgian facades of Bath, Brighton, Cheltenham, and even Clifton in Bristol.

Whilst Francis holds no title and is no architect, he's descended from a long line of Bristol Merchant Venturers (Mountjoy and Thornton's) and that of an earldom within earlier English Civil War novels of mine featuring the Earl of Loxton. Francis  has inherited a vast fortune and becomes an investor, a young man with idealistic views as to what the City of Bath will become with vast crescents, and  glorious town houses. But his life is marred with personal unhappiness until by chance he makes the acquaintance of Cassandra.       

Book Blurb:

... “No one, absolutely no one will dare disturb us, unless the house catches fire”...

Cassandra never envisaged a week in the countryside with her cousin would lead to childish mischief. The prospect of the village stocks looms when they are caught trespassing within a grand country house. However, the law is the law, and the price of freedom in Cassandra’s case proves more costly than imagined, for she loses her heart to the very man whose portrait Sarah had fallen in love with, the man Sarah insists she will tempt and seduce at will. Cassandra’s release from custody by the man himself fuels jealousy and rivalry between her and Sarah. But when shocking revelations of a scandalous affair and illicit passions set precedence for a hasty elopement, stunned by it all, Cassandra discovers passionate asides can lead to true love and romance in the strangest of circumstance.

I hope and pray readers will enjoy this story for what it is - a touch of real-time history in the making and a touching love story! It's in paperback as well as e-book format. 

Amazon US   Amazon UK

See my article post  - The Building of Georgian Bath.

The Creation of Georgian Bath!

This is the City in which Jane Austen removed to from Hampshire, at a time in her life when the realities of renting property and feeding a household required a frugal existence. She related her findings of hardship within Sense and Sensibility, though her existence as a Parson's daughter was in stark contrast to that of the Dashwood's fall from the grand lifestyle of a vast country estate to the meagre confines of a little cottage in Devon. Nonetheless, rent paid for a house in Bath and no land on which to grow meat or produce for the house, monies soon fell short in Jane's life. Later, from her letters, we see she relied more and more on family charity and thereby a roof over her head, thus she moved from one residence to another with a great deal of regularity. There is a strange circumstance too, which is rarely spoken of - why did the Austen children live elsewhere rather than within the family house. Why did the Knight family adopt Edward? It was common practice in Jane Austen's time and long before and you can read why here. Cassandra too lived away a great deal, residing with family and the family her brother married into, hence numerous letters betwixt Jane and Cassandra. Read Jane's letters in Diedre le Faye's book compilation of Jane Austen's Letters.                

The City of Bath, set within the Vale of Avon, and within the County of Somerset, has long been looked upon as the Georgian City of Bath. And ever since Jane Austen lived there, albeit for a short while, few people realise her preference lay with Bristol, Clifton, in particular. Why might that be? If you've been to, or know Clifton, the answer lies in its elevation and the views which were spectacular in her day. 

Click on picture to enlarge!

View from Clifton before the grand terraces and crescents of Georgian Bristol were built. 

From Clifton she looked out across Bristol and the surrounding countryside to the River Avon below, and to the River Severn and the Bristol Channel (tidal waters) running betwixt the West Country and Wales. Clifton was quite unlike Bath, or the old City of Bristol. Although both city centres are set down in a basin surrounded by hills, quite small in modern terms, and at one time consisting of mediaeval buildings. Bristol had the advantage as the second most important sea port in England during the 16th-17th centuries, it was fought over time and time again throughout the years of the English Civil Wars (1642-1649), but as with other great sea ports, such as Plymouth, in the days of Sir Francis Drake, other ports gradually took precedence with shifting fortunes, political and military necessities of war with Napoleon. 

Sadly, in the height of the slave trade Bristol became blighted with a bad reputation for harbouring slavers. Hence as the abolition movement increased in momentum and focus centred on Bristol port in the late 1700s, slavers sought other ports and moved ships up north and to London with wares brought back from the West Indies to disguise their other trade.       

Bristol port was originally in the heart of the city, long since built on and all but disappeared barring a few remnants of the port, and the new port lies farther out on the Western edge of the city.

Bristol Harbour in the 1700s.   

The building of Georgian Bath began with the building of Milsom Street and other in 1762, instigated by Thomas Lightholder. The majority of the buildings were grand town houses incorporating existing detached properties, and it quickly became a commercial street when a bank took up residence followed by goldsmiths, modistes, tailors, et al. Bath was beginning towards a hub of social activity associated with the taking of the waters at the hot springs of the Roman Baths. Thus, Pulteney Bridge was completed in 1774, and likewise Great Pulteney Street and Laura Place became desirable residences. Before all that bridges were far lesser and required a little forethought in which route to take from Keynsham bridge to old bridge in bath, the same in coming from London to Bath, and schooners actually navigated upstream to Bath from Bristol on high tide. 

Old Bridge Bath. 

Earlier John Wood the elder (architect) had a grand visions for new build projects. He leased large tracts of land beyond the old city walls - his plan included Queen Square, the Parades, the Circus and other great ventures. His perception involved the grandeur of palaces combined with the practicality of mini mansions as private houses. Similar to today's builds, plots were individually leased to builders & tradesmen, all able to cater for tenants of differing purses, but each build was subject to Wood's façades of uniform Georgian splendour. His grand plans were created with the visions of Palladian grandeur, not altogether new within England, for similar could be seen with vast country estates such as Blenheim Palace, the Duke of Marlborough's grand house completed in 1722, and of course, the Duke of Devonshire's country estate Chatsworth, the new build which began in 1687, though both have Stuart influence as well.    

Two images of Pulteney Bridge to show how beautiful it was during the late 1700s

In both pictures one can see the original diagonal weir, not the modern weir of today that was built in the 20th century. At either side/end of the weir stood two grain mills!

One of the first Crescents to be built was The Royal Crescent and later, Lansdown Crescent (upper edge of pic in the distance) - note the boats on the Avon.

Another view of Lansdown Crescent.

And here we have the Royal Crescent - originally known only as The Crescent.  

Second perspective of the RC. 

And of course, as authors, we have to remember only the Lower Assembly rooms existed in the early part of Georgian Bath along with the original Pump Room.

  

Lower Assembly Rooms with Harrison's Walks (Gardens) Now part of the Parade, since the lower assembly rooms no longer exist.

The Pump Room - 
And one simply cannot mention Bath and leave Beau Nash out of the frame, he, who became the master of ceremonies within the City of Bath's social whirl, and he really did rule the social order with a metaphorical iron glove. 

Thus, the building of Georgian Bath plays a small background roll to my novel -

In Love with a Portrait. 

Sometimes it's nice to escape Regency England and step back in time to the Georgian period proper. And that's what I did. 

And this is Harrison's Walks in the present day - Parade Gardens.

Book Blurb:

... “No one, absolutely no one will dare disturb us, unless the house catches fire”...

Cassandra never envisaged a week in the countryside with her cousin would lead to childish mischief. The prospect of the village stocks looms when they are caught trespassing within a grand country house. However, the law is the law, and the price of freedom in Cassandra’s case proves more costly than imagined, for she loses her heart to the very man whose portrait Sarah had fallen in love with, the man Sarah insists she will tempt and seduce at will. Cassandra’s release from custody by the man himself fuels jealousy and rivalry between her and Sarah. But when shocking revelations of a scandalous affair and illicit passions set precedence for a hasty elopement, stunned by it all, Cassandra discovers passionate asides can lead to true love and romance in the strangest of circumstance.

Amazon US   Amazon UK

  

Ratafia - Innocent Regency Cordial?

Ratafia

Renowned as a ladies cordial within the Regency era, though a much loved drink throughout the Georgian period, it is anything but as innocent as implied.

The ingredients suggest ladies enjoyed a little alcoholic tipple more than might be thought by those who had never partaken of the "supposed innocent" cordial!

Potent - or what?

Ingredients:

1 quart of brandy

• 
  
• ½ bottle champagne
• 
  
• 1/2 cup of gin
• 
  
• 
  
• ¼ cup of sugar
• 
  
• 2 oranges
• 
  
• 2 cups of cherries, pitted and squashed
• 
  
• 2 cups of blackberries
• 
  
• Dash of cinnamon
• 
  
• Dash of nutmeg
• 
  
• 1 teaspoon powdered rosemary
• Three cloves (bruised)
• 
  
• ¼ cup crushed almonds
• 
  

The Process:

Mix in a gallon glass jar. Cap jar and shake. Store in dark cupboard for three weeks, removing once a week to shake jar. 

After three weeks, strain liquid through a cheesecloth, pressing down on solids to release their liquid. Distribute and store in several pint jars or tightly corked wine bottles.

Georgian Hairstyles pre-Regency era.

Hairstyles of the Georgian period! 

This article attempts to address the balance of hairstyles and fashion, because far too many readers and literary critics (who deem sense of expertise in matters of Georgian England) often seem to forget the greater part of the Georgian Period occurred within the 1700s - being that of  the 18th Century. Hence modicum of confusion arises with the coming of the Regency Era of the 1800s, being that of the 19th Century in matters of fashion, which includes hairstyles.

In this picture are examples of Georgian hair styling.

The first image represents back-combed hair with short ringlets and powered for fashionable effect.

The second image is a young lady with natural hair in a pretty and becoming style, and this style remained popular for unmarried ladies until the coming of the Greek revivalist movement during the Regency era, when men went for the Corinthian, the Adonis, and other fashionable bent, whilst women went for short curls framing the face, top-knots and dangling ringlets.  

The third picture is a strawberry-roan wig, no doubt similar in colour to the ladies natural hair colour, also lightly powdered.    

To take stock of the early/mid part of the Georgian Period of England, it helps to remember Marie Antoinette was Queen of France, wife of Louis XVI at that time.

Marie Antoinette.

She was renowned for her outrageous wigs, but not all women during the Georgian period wore wigs, though some did, as did the Duchess of Devonshire when married, but when young she merely lightly powdered her hair and had it styled to the fashion of one long coil of hair over her shoulder similar the middle image top of page. 

Duchess of Devonshire

Other ladies of note, namely Lady Sheffield,  wore long style wigs.

Whilst Mary Hamilton had her own hair styled and powdered.

The following images are of TV/Movie productions, almost all with relevant hairstyles for the Georgian period - and pretty obvious which of these are wigs. Note the hairstyle bottom left corner which is totally wrong for Georgian period, not even early Victorian and is late Victorian /Edwardian. 

Just prior to the Regency era, hairstyles were softer, wigs were worn far less by women who had lovely hair, though married women often still powdered their hair. And by now waistlines had crept upward, the A-line/French Empire line taking precedence. 

By the Regency Era young girls were still given to wearing hair in loose coils (down) for informal dress, and up for formal occasions. Married ladies and mistresses always wore it up!

In the year George, Prince of Wales, took office as the Prince Regent, the year of 1811, he assumed the working role of head of State in his father's stead. George III was sadly diagnosed as mentally incapable, thus the Prince of Wales, now Prince Regent had no idea when his father the king would die nor how long before he would become the monarch. 

In 1820 The Regent became King. 

The Regency era was at end, a mere 9 yrs in tenure, but Regency fashion and hairstyles continued until William IV became King on George IV's demise in 1830, merely ten years after the Regent became King. 

During the reign of William IV ladies waistlines dropped, hairstyles went to buns and bunches, and silly side curls come the death of William in 1837, thus Princess Victoria became Queen.  

Young Victoria!