Lady of the House: Elite 19th Century Women and their Role in the English Country House

Chapter 1

Character Synopsis

To read the letters of the long dead is to summon up a veritable army of apparitions; to be bombarded with the complexities and particularities of countless comfortable lives lived outside the spotlight of history¹

Amanda Vickery

As readers and people interested in history, we are familiar with the infamous stories of characters throughout English history – Winston Churchill, Henry VIII and his six wives, William the Conqueror and other characters whose lives have been repeatedly explored by historians and writers. Whilst these stories give us an incredible tale of infidelity and lust, of duty and command, they do have the tendency to insinuate that those stories are the only one’s worth telling (it is also interesting that they are all stories of male characters). Country house historians have also tended to steer towards the dramatic, unusual or controversial. Whilst stories of hidden romance, upstairs and downstairs relationships and abandoned mothers may turn the page and give the reader the much longed-for twinge of melodrama, it can eclipse the everyday stories throughout history.

Ruth Larsen in her PhD thesis about women in the country house brought to my attention that many of the popular biographies of female country house owners focus on the controversial lives of women who were famous or infamous during the eighteenth and nineteenth century such as the Duchess of Devonshire or the Lennox sisters.²

What I want to do, and indeed what Larsen did for Yorkshire country house owners, is to look at the stories of the ordinary country house owner, the ladies who have had little or no coverage in modern biographies, who perhaps didn’t do anything scandalous or notable but who achieved great things. I want to tell these stories because the fact they didn’t scandalise the gentry of the time does not mean their stories aren’t worth reading. I think that the fact these women achieved what they did in their lifetimes, dealt with the tragedy that hit them and did it all whilst maintaining the decorum and expectations of the society of the time actually makes them more admirable.

Amanda Vickery in her book The Gentleman’s Daughter, stated that ‘the determination of authors to claim that the single turning point in gender history conveniently occurred in the period of their own book means that chronological inconsistencies continue to abound’.³ Bearing this in mind, it is my task within this book to look at the historical changes that were happening during the nineteenth century, to identify key historian’s thoughts about the period and to provide context to our characters. It is not the intention of this book to talk in depth about topics such as gender status in the period, economic or political changes, childbirth and upbringing or any other broader topic, but to give some background information to lend context to the times that these women were living in.

The purpose of this book is to bring to light the stories of three incredible women who completed a range of domestic and business expectations during their lives and to introduce you to three women who succeeded and flourished within their marriage. These stories challenge pre-conceived views that women of the period were restricted, confined and at the liberty of their husbands, and instead show that whilst marriage in some circumstances could be restrictive, it could also enable women to achieve status and respect as an individual as well as one half of a couple. This, it can be argued, is because of the men they chose to marry – ‘chose’ being the key word. None of these women were forced into a marriage but chose their spouse – yes, they would probably have been encouraged to choose from a particular pool of eligible young men because as Vickery says, ‘if young people met only suitable companions, they would assuredly make a suitable, free choice.’⁴

Some may argue that the reason these women were able to choose the right men was due to economic freedom; a woman born to poverty may not be able to make such a positive match because she is not privy to the advancements of an elite woman. However, I cannot completely agree with that. Certainly, there are different stations and backgrounds in life throughout history, and within the eighteenth and nineteenth century especially, but there was nothing to stop a middle- or working-class woman from procuring a good match and establishing herself successfully within her own home in the same way, if on a smaller scale, than our elite women.

The women I have chosen for this study have come to my attention through my work within country houses but also because, as I have read around the subject, their stories have jumped out at me. Stories such as that of Harriet Cavendish, who was raised in a dysfunctional family and eventually married her aunt’s lover – to great success. If that sentence does not get you intrigued in her character, I do not know what will. It certainly intrigued me and I have had the opportunity to explore her life and learn more about a remarkable woman who entertained Parisian society alongside her husband, proving she could succeed in politics as well as raising a family, which incidentally included her aunt’s illegitimate children.

I came across Mary Isham’s story when I was working at Lamport Hall; when conducting tours of the house I would find myself referring back to architectural changes and garden landscaping made by Mary Isham. It intrigued me because up to that point I had believed it was the husbands who would have been responsible for large projects such as architectural changes to the Hall. As I read more into her story, I discovered a true matriarch who moved Lamport from an outdated and eclectic country house into a true nineteenth-century stately home which exuded the status of the Isham family. Her story was not without its trials however, she suffered the loss of her daughter, husband, eldest son and youngest granddaughter within her lifetime, and lived long enough to see her younger son replace many of the changes she had made.

Architectural triumph in the face of tragedy was a common motif in the life of Elizabeth Manners, 5th Duchess of Rutland, who endured the loss of three of her children, two sons in infancy and one daughter in early childhood as well as professional loss from a fire which saw almost all of the hard work she had put into renovating her home, Belvoir Castle, destroyed. Despite the loss of children and the ruination of her hard work, in the last years of her life she worked endlessly to rebuild Belvoir Castle into the palatial stately home we see today, as well as implementing the Capability Brown designed landscapes. Her story is truly one of endurance through tragedy and achieving success in its midst.

So, whilst these women may not have had public affairs, they didn’t run off with inappropriate men or have illegitimate children, they did live incredible lives and leave behind legacies which are still tangible today.

Below is a brief outline of some of the key facts, dates and information about each of the women in this study. I have done this as a reference so that the text itself does not become too tied down in reiterating dates and information and instead allows the stories to be brought forward.

Lady Mary Isham

Harriet Leveson Gower, Countess Granville

Elizabeth Manners, Duchess of Rutland

For the purpose of keeping things understandable in this study I will be referring to my women by their maiden name up to the point of their marriage and then I will refer to them by their married surname. In the chapter about their marriage I will refer to them by their full married title once and should one of my women succeed to a title during their lifetime (for example Harriet becomes Countess Granville later in life) then I will mention their full title at the time I mention their succession. Otherwise they will be referred to as ‘Harriet Leveson Gower’ or simply ‘Harriet’.

A full list of persons mentioned in this book can be seen in the index on page 151.

Chapter 2

Early Influence

…an increase in the affective content of family life meant that young women remained emotionally tied to their families of birth even years after they had married.

Judith Schneid Lewis¹

For centuries, scientists and psychologists have attempted to determine to what extent upbringing and family involvement can influence a child’s behaviour and their future personality. The nature v. nurture debate has raged for hundreds of years and continues to, to this day. The theory was originally developed by John Locke in 1690 who believed in a ‘blank slate’ status of being when a person was born. That person would then become a certain personality, successful or a failure, depending on what was written onto their slate during the course of their life. Such beliefs were then vehemently opposed during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries when researchers believed that genetics held the key to personality and behaviour. It was during this time that the term ‘nature v. nurture’ was coined and subsequent decades of research continued to work on the extent to which one or the other was more influential.

It is now commonly recognised that upbringing and genetics are both involved in the shaping of a child’s personality and behaviour in the early years of their life, and both have an impact on the adult life of an individual. It is an argument that still rages today and which is important in investigating the lives of the women featured in this study who acted independently from their families, whilst still being shaped by them. When thinking about child development in the nineteenth century, it is important to look at the different roles for children across society because life for children in poverty could differ vastly from those with wealth.

It will come as little surprise that in the nineteenth century the role of a working-class child and the expectations of childhood began to change drastically. Up to the time of the industrial revolution, most children primarily lived a life free of responsibility. If they came from the lower, working classes they would find themselves helping out at home, where most ‘work’ was based, assuming more work-like responsibilities, but they were not treated as an adult capable of working an adult’s hours. The industrial revolution however, saw an increase in poor children beginning to lead proper working lives; mill shifts that ran to twelve or fourteen hours a day with little or no breaks. Children as young as 8 worked within the mills and mines of the time, a role which robbed them of their youthful freedom.

But what of richer children? It is true that for the most part, the lives of children from privileged homes did not change much during this period, and certainly their expectations within an adult world were not altered. Wealthy children born in the late eighteenth century would have had a rather similar upbringing to those born throughout the nineteenth century. Georgiana Spencer, future Duchess of Devonshire, had a similar upbringing to her grandchildren by Harriet and Granville Leveson Gower, despite a gap of almost fifty years. Both were raised in a nursery within large country estates or in London, often travelling with the family when they moved and sometimes accompanying their parents when they travelled to Europe to places such as Paris and Italy. Children of this period did not have worries or responsibilities, but were free to be children, playing and learning. Still, it was a period of change, and children born during this time would see the world become a completely different place during their lifetime. Women would have stronger roles and voices in society, a new industrial-born upper class would have greater financial influence over the country, the role of the aristocracy would be greatly reduced and the country house would see a boom unlike any before or afterwards.

The first ten years of the life of a child born into the gentry was relatively similar whether they were boy or girl; subtle differences might be included in terms of how they were treated by the family (boys, especially heirs, were often aware of their importance in the family dynasty from a young age and so developed strong, sometimes arrogant characters), and there may be some subtle differences in the education that they received; although generally they would have shared a school room in those early years, where they would be taught together by a governess or tutor how to read, write, do basic arithmetic and to speak a secondary language, usually French.

There have been many depictions in popular culture, both in books and films, of childhood in the Victorian period being very closed off from one’s parents, the obligatory evening ‘talk with mama and papa’ being a symbol of a child’s separation from their parents, however this was not the rule for all families and the family unit was not quite so separated in the decades preceding Queen Victoria’s reign. Whilst children had separate lives in terms of their education, their games and often their own staff to care for them, they also spent a lot of time in the company of their parents, learning about their role in society as well as socialising with them. Due to the nature of genteel and aristocratic families, parents would often need to be separated from their children whilst at social events or political events, sometimes leaving their children in the country whilst they travelled to London for example; however, we also know that many families also moved together as a unit. We also know that in the move from public to private lives, which will be discussed in subsequent chapters, the family unit became much closer and parents were more involved in the lives of their children, focusing more on the individual and nurturing the emotional attachment.

For young boys and girls, the differences would begin to be more apparent as they reached the age of 10. Boys would sometimes be separated from their sisters for the hours of education, being taught by a tutor they would learn science, history, geography, languages and many more practical subjects. Girls would continue to be taught by a governess but would begin to learn other practical skills such as needlework, playing a piano or harp, dancing, and the preparation of a household, including how to host society events. These two very different educations prepared the children for their different roles in society and yet they were not always so separated. Some families chose to educate their daughters to a higher level, and research shows that it came mainly down to the decisions and experiences of the parent as to the educational arrangements for their children.

Education throughout the centuries in England developed slowly and has only existed in its current form since the Education Act of 1918, when education between the ages of 5 and 14 years old became compulsory, and following that, the Education Act of 1944 where the modern system of schooling, with a split between primary and secondary schools, was formally recognised throughout the country. In the 200 years prior to the Act, education developed from being a perk of the wealthy, to being available for all. Initially, in the early modern period, formal education was reserved for boys who were either from wealthy backgrounds, or were planning a career within the church. This was due to the fact that the church was solely responsible for education and the supply of education at this time. It wasn’t until the early 1800s when education for all poorer children was considered and implemented. It started with the Sunday school which allowed children to learn to read and write whilst avoiding education during the week when most poor children, should the opportunity arise, were employed and bringing extra income into their homes.

In 1833 education became more formalised, with parliament taking an active hand in the provision of education to the children of England. In August of that year, government voted that taxes should provide for free schools for poor children and this gradually developed over the next seventy years into formal, compulsory education for all children in Britain.

Whilst education for poor children, as it developed, provided for both boys and girls, education for the elite still focused very much on the education of sons rather than daughters. The education of sons and daughters will be looked at in further detail in chapter five when we explore the educational choices of our women, but we do know that whilst sons were usually sent away to school, sometimes from as young as 8 or 9, daughters remained at home and continued with their education under the instruction of both their governess and their mother, who would do their best to establish an educated and yet malleable young woman who was perfectly prepared to be a wife and mother in the future.

Young women would also gain practical experience in the way to behave and the expectations of their adult life through their social interactions. As children they would have very little connection to the adult world but as they approached their middle-teen years and were increasingly prepared for their ‘coming out’ into society, they would become more involved in the social activities of their parents, attending lunches, charity events and other suitable occasions. This would give them practical knowledge that they could recall when married and attending these events alone, or even when hosting events themselves. The London Season provided the perfect stage for young women to emerge into society and put their practised skills to good use.

Whilst there certainly was an expected process for the life and upbringing of an aristocratic child in the nineteenth century, the actuality of life could differ greatly depending on the circumstances of the aristocratic family. If a family had suffered the loss of a wife and mother, the children would grow up without a maternal figure in their lives. Also, an only child, especially if it was the son and heir, would be raised much differently to a family where the nursery was full of children.

Harriet Cavendish

The story of Harriet Cavendish has been largely ignored by major historians who have preferred to concentrate on the life of her illustrious mother Georgiana Devonshire and her elder sister Georgiana Howard. What we do have are excellent records of Harriet’s letters throughout her life which have been meticulously collated together in two volumes, the first by her grandson George Leveson Gower which document the years up to her marriage, and the second volume is by Virginia Surtees who collated letters from Harriet’s marriage until the death of her husband Granville in 1846. In these letters, we get an insight into her life and thoughts, however it should be