THE INHERITANCE NOVEL: THE POWER OF STRICT SETTLEMENT
LANGUAGE IN CLARISSA, EVELINA AND
PRIDE AND PREJUDICE
BY
Linda Kane Scott
B.A. Davis and Elkins College, 1970
M.A. University of Maine, 1992
A THESIS
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
(Individualized in English)
The Graduate School
The University of Maine
August, 2003
Advisory Committee:
Deborah Rogers, Professors of English, Advisor
Naomi Jacobs, Professor of English
Ken Norris,
Professor of English
Nancy MacKnight, Associate Professor of English
Nancv Weitz,
Assistant Professor of English
The Inheritance Novel: The Power of Strict Settlement
Language in Clarissa, Evelina and
Pride and Prejudice
By Linda Kane Scott
Thesis Advisor: Dr. Deborah Rogers
An Abstract of the Thesis Presented
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
(Individualized in English)
August, 2003
This study will be the first to look at the effect
of
the
strict
characters
pervasive
of
to
settlement
three
on
the
language,
eighteenth-century
specific
novels
is
the
plots
novels.
and
So
language
of
inheritance in the eighteenth century that some novels
should be considered what I call "inheritance novels."
Clarissa, Evelina and Pride and Prejudice all display a
uniqueness in the way they deal with inheritance laws.
The eighteenth century married an empowered gentry
characterized by an insatiable appetite for land to a
newly adapted legal force armed with a tightly-structured
inheritance policy based on primogeniture and strict new
standards
combination
for
of
marriageable
legal
and
women.
social
This
policies
unique
bumped
up
against another eighteenth-century innovation-the novel.
Three
inheritance
points
are
fundamental
novels:
First,
the
in
authors
identifying
have
personal
experience with and/or are familiar with the language and
practice
of
strict
Second,
the
plots
settlement
manipulated
settlement
are
practice.
and marriage
heavily
Third,
influenced
the
practices.
by
strict
characters
are
through the language of inheritance or are
able to use inheritance language in such a way as to
silence or endanger other characters.
Inheritance novels ultimately
worthiness to inherit.
of
this
study
all
prove
a
character's
The three novels used in the body
show
the
three
characteristics
of
inheritance novels, though inheritance in each differs in
its characteristics and its outcomes.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Deborah Rogers is my supervisor, my friend, and the
reason I am where I am today.
I grow up.
I want to be like her when
I am thankful to her, not only for guiding me
through my degree, but for being the superb teacher and
mentor she is.
Because of her, I am well educated and
well prepared for the classroom.
After
Deborah,
my
husband
George
and
my
sons,
Christian and Oliver, put up with my physical presence
and
mental
complained.
absences
for
five
long
years
and
never
They, too, supported me and encouraged me.
The fruition of this dissertation involved many, but
Naomi Jacobs worked incredibly hard to make my thesis
presentable, Nancy MacKnight worked hard to help me rise
to this occasion. Nancy Weitz just knows how to make me
write the right things and put my thinking on paper.
encouragement
American
has
been
priceless.
literature mentor,
Ken
Norris
Her
is my
showing me the connections
across the oceans during the eighteenth century and then
teaching me to learn with my soul as well as my head.
Judy Eyerer was an incredible technical editor. Evelyn
Scheck, Lynette Eckersley, Me1 Johnson, Nancy Marks, and
Clare
Grindal
all
contributed
their
time
and
intelligence.
I
must
also
thank
Linne
Mooney
for
encouraging my program and always being my best supporter
and Pat Burnes for always being willing to help, a steady
friend and spiritual writing guide.
Josephine Donovan
has been a close mentor and friend, the ultimate teacher
of feminist theory. Burt Hatlen and Virginia Nees-Hatlen
proved to me everyday why UMO is such a gold mine of
talent and grace. Marilyn Emerick kept me honest.
I would be remiss if I did not mention Ulrich Wicks,
one of the finest professors and friends I have had in my
life.
I
wish
that
he
could
be
here
to
see
this
dissertation, but I know he has been with me during the
writing.
I find it nearly impossible to express my gratitude
to the University of Maine for allowing me to pursue this
degree.
The Graduate School and the College of Arts and
Sciences have enthusiastically supported me.
My deepest
and sincerest gratitude, however, is to the Department of
English.
Their patient optimism and support has meant
everything to the success of this dissertation.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ii
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Willful Intent: . . . . . . . . . . . . - 1
The Inheritance Novel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - 1
Chapter One
Learning the Language of Inheritance
. . . . . . .
4
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Inheriting Land and Language . . . . . . . . . . -19
Affirmations and Applications . . . . . . . . . . 23
Raising a Family
Conclusion
ChapterTwo
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
-38
40
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -40
Unhappy Transactions
Introduction
. . . .
44
. . . . . . . . . . . .
53
Richardson and the Language of Settlement
Constructing Clarissa
. . . . . . . . . . . -64
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Willing the Harlowe Family
Lovelace and His Legacy
. . . . . . . . .
84
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
92
The Howe and the Harlowe Women
Clarissa as Inheritor
Conclusion
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
96
Chapter Three
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
103
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
103
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
103
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
113
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
116
Solutions from Mrs . Selwyn
. . . . . . . . . . .
142
The Inheritance of Evelina
. . . . . . . . . . .
149
Advising Ms
Anville
Introduction
Mentoring Ms
.
Burney
Guarding Evelina
Chapter Four
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .156
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
156
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
156
Property Rites
Introduction
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
Discourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
Personal Prejudice
Daughters and
. . . . . . . . 181
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
The Wrong Man in the Right Place
Mr . Wickham's World
Conclusion
Chapter Five
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
201
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
207
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
207
The Inheritance Novel
Conclusions about Clarissa. Evelina and Pride
and Prejudice
WORKS CITED
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .218
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
229
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
237
BIOGRAPHY OF THE AUTHOR
Chapter One
Willful Intent:
The Power of Strict Settlement in the
Eighteen-Century Novel
The Inheritance Novel
Land,
wealth,
politics
and
marriage
make
up
the
complicated and powerful structure of inheritance in the
eighteenth
century.
Though
we
tend
to
think
of
inheritance in terms of death, in the eighteenth century,
inheritance was connected to birth, marriage and coming
of age.
to
Strict settlement and inheritance practice came
their
prove
height
powerful
in the
enough
to
eighteenth
stay
century,
alive
until
but
would
the
early
1920s.
Inheritance practice in the eighteenth century was
one of the controlling forces of the culture of the upper
classes.
Its attendant power was readily recognizable in
and useful to the plots of several early novels, and,
therefore,
I
believe
those
novels
should
be
called
"inheritance novels."
what
the
practice
Three factors combine to inform
"inheritance
was
a
powerful
novel."
First,
cultural
force
inheritance
significantly
affected language and contributing to the communication
of
public
and
private
individuals.
The
authors
of
inheritance novels were familiar with strict settlement
practice, understood its language and often had personal
experience related to inheritance practice.
Second, in
inheritance novels, characters adopt inheritance language
for
personal
effective
use
and
communication
characters
to
inheritance
often
or
language
silences
communicate.
language
that
Lastly,
for personal
use
the
disrupts
efforts
characters
and
of
adopt
often
that
language disrupts effective communication or silences the
efforts of characters to communicate.
Of the group of novels characterized by factors of
inheritance,
this
Samuel Richardson's
study
will
closely
examine
Clarissa, Frances Burney's
and Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice.
three:
Evelina,
In each of these
novels, a family memberfs will
or settlement directly
affects the female protagonist.
Wills and settlements
also
actions
direct
characters,
the motivations
creating
and
tension
for
of
the
ancillary
heroine.
Inheritance concerns disrupt effective communication for
her, or they silence characters around her who could save
her great pain and misery, and even, sometimes, forestall
her death.
Each
chapter
of
this
examination of the author's
law.
study
begins
with
the
relationship to inheritance
Those authors had strong opinions about, or direct
experience
with,
settlement,
inheritance
specifically.
practices
Richardson,
and
as
strict
a
master
printer, published the Journals of the House of Commons,
and his intimate relationship with many members of the
House
gave him access to the discussions and debates
surrounding many
regarding
of
the
inheritance
publisher.
laws
introduced
practices
while
and
he
enacted
was
the
Burney and her family experienced the power
of strict settlement in making marriages and taking away
legacies.
involved
Burney' s
in
secret
stepsister
marriages
and
stepmother
rivaling
any
plot
were
of
Burney's novels.
The family situation of Jane Austen is
well documented.
She spent all of her life on the edge
of
respectability, watching
derived
from
inheritance
the
benefits
practice
and
her brothers
preferment
and
feeling personally the pinch of strict settlement gone
awry.
Each discussion makes it clear that the author
incorporated
the
language
and
habits
of
inheritance
specifically to drive
the plot.
First, however,
the
modern reader must be acquainted with the practice and
language of inheritance and strict settlement.
Learning the Language of Inheritance
England in the seventeenth century saw the rise of
the novel, the burgeoning wealth of the merchant class
and the beginning of strong, powerful political parties
vying for control during the formation of a new, modern
culture.
The English Civil War influenced the direction
and thinking of the succeeding culture.
changing
events
and
ideas,
Among rapidly
inheritance
practice
dramatically turned in favor of strict settlement (which
is explained below), in part, due to the rising wealth of
the merchant
class and the power
political parties.
of the newly
formed
The novel, another new and dramatic
change in communication, would be one of the eighteenth
century's
cultural developments affected by inheritance
practice,
its
language and
the
changes
it brought
to
society.
What follows is a brief explanation of the influence
of inheritance practice, which is necessary to understand
its
influence
on
the
language of
the
novel.
Recent
studies
focusing
on
the
economy
or
the
law
of
the
eighteenth century have produced fine critical analyses
of economic and legal events during the period.
The
purpose of this study is not to adopt such economic or
legal detail, but to show the confluence of these ideas
and their effects on the eighteenth-century novel.
This
study does depend, however, on several recent studies to
provide foundation for its objectives.
For the purposes
of this study, an explanation of primogeniture and strict
settlement is necessary.
Primogeniture dominated English inheritance practice
from the time of the Norman Conquest until early in the
twentieth century.
Its usage varied widely through the
ages, but, by the eighteenth century, primogeniture had
generally come to mean that the eldest male child of a
family
would
inherit
all
realty
within
that
Realty included all land, or real property.
family.
Personalty
included money, chattel, stocks and bonds, the ephemeral
wealth of an estate.
Under primogeniture, a common law
practice, a female could inherit an estate if there was
no male heir.
If this should occur, a family estate
would
another
pass
marriage.
to
family
through
a
daughterfs
Further, if there was no male heir, or if a
father wished, he could allows equal portions to all his
children.
Such an action would divide an estate until,
within a few generations, through constant division, the
original estate would disappear completely.1
All this was cause of concern at the beginning of
the century, but
inheritance practice in general only
became of prime concern when land began to mean power in
earnest.
Until the eighteenth century, most
land in
England rested in the hands of the very few aristocratic
families.
Because of their continuing money problems,
nobility during
land poor.
the
eighteenth
century were
generally
Their cash flow problems stemmed, in part,
from the Civil War, and some noble families found their
land confiscated after the war.
merchant
classes,
money,
for
Before the rise of the
any
class,
had
little
material potency other than enabling them the acquisition
of land, where real power lay.
and
expanded during
merchant
holdings
government
bringing
and
value
to
to
the
As English business grew
eighteenth century, extensive
provided
money
private
actual
to
industrial
money,
giving
the
British
development,
it
a
new
importance.
1
Eileen Spring's Law, Land and Family provides an excellent chapter
on the historical ramifications of primogeniture before the
eighteenth century.
Most
money
professionals.
was
in
the
hands
of
merchants
and
New ports, new frontiers, new ventures,
all provided English businessmen with immense opportunity
to make money.
Money was venture capital, investment,
power, but it was not a bottom line on a bank account.
It was not cash in the pocket.
Pocket money, spending
money was not yet en vogue, as shops and shopping were
still in their infancy.
Money made men rich; but, for
purposes other than business, money held little reward.
Money was, however, the first step to real power, for it
could buy land.2
One of the Civil War's outcomes was the formation of
the
Tory
and
Whig
parties,
which
would
change
the
structure of the House of Commons, endowing it with its
recognizably modern features.
Sitting for election to
the House of Commons in the eighteenth century meant that
a man must be a landowner or have a title.
Eventually,
having
king
both
was
the
best
solution.
The
often
conferred titles in order to influence crucial votes,
2
Two legal authorities are vital to the foundation of this study.
Eileen Spring has written widely and wisely about the effects of
strict settlement in families from the 1500s to the 1800s, and John
Habbakuk has done the same, though well before Spring. Of the
literary critics who are now making inroads into the influence of
economics and law on eighteenth-century literature, Sandra Sherman,
April London, Nancy Armstrong and Susan Greenfield are important for
highlighting economic influences and gender issues in the early
novel.
usually on fiscal matters, but these titles were nonhereditary.
Families would have to raise substantial
sums and garner much property to be considered to keep
the title once the original endowment passed away.
Merchant
families wanted
land and
wanted to live according to their means.
the
other hand, wanted money
ancestral estates.
both,
both
They
Aristocracy, on
order to
keep their
While the situation seems ideal for
sides
intermarriage and
in
titles.
came
to
interclass
the
realization
socializing,
that
exchange
of
property, and intermingling of noble and common lineage
were
inevitable, yet
incurred
tensions,
fraught with
creating
a
unimaginable class-
stranglehold
on
legal
marriage and inheritance contracts as they then existed.
Primogeniture could no longer accommodate the needs
of the upper classes for several reasons.
First, through
the authority of common law, a vast estate, having no
male
heir, could legally be put
into the hands
daughter, thus into the hands of her husband's
of a
family,
eradicating not only the family estate, but also, and
more importantly, the family name.
Second, vast estates
could be broken into smaller and smaller parcels through
equal distribution to all heirs, male and female.
In
order to keep an estate and enlarge it, allowing a family
the ability to gain title or a seat in the House, landed
families had to devise a stronger and narrower practice
of inheritance that would not come under the jurisdiction
of common law and that could stand on its own regulation.
Strict settlement, or the practice of attaching a
rigid,
unchangeable
succession
of
male
heirs
to
an
estate, was designed exclusively to keep large estates in
the
hands
of
male
inheritors
jurisdiction of common law.
a will.
and
free
from
the
A strict settlement was not
Strict settlement was a practice separate from
other inheritance practices.
Thus, the eldest male and
estate owner could not only rely on strict settlement to
formulate the passing of the family estate, but he could
also
write
specific
personal
family
wills
members,
in
order
willing
to
provide
away
for
specific
personalty, or "ephemeral" property as he wished.
Thus,
while a will could be contested through the common law
courts, the transition of land through strict settlement
could not.
John
Habbakuk
tells
us
that
the
legal
act
of
according inherited property to an eldest son, or in the
absence of a son, to the next legal living male member of
a family was the basis for strict settlement and prior to
its inception, the intrinsic foundation of primogeniture
(2).
on
Eileen Spring discusses primogeniture with a focus
its
effects
on
heiresses.
She
observes
that
"landowner" is a word that in the eighteenth century did
not include a widow or daughter, as females were never to
be part of the discussion of language of inheritance.
a husband's
At
death, a wife, under the auspices of common
law, however, became a powerful entity.
She often had
the power to take over a family business and control its
money,
stocks and bonds-personalty-lef t behind
deceased.
by
the
The lot of a widow underscores the difference
in power
between
settlement laws and common law, the
regulation of realty, or an estate, and the distribution
of personalty (Law
8-12)
, .
Strict settlement's
rigid succession of male heirs
was guaranteed through a list of successors who would
inherit should an eldest son not be alive or born at the
time
of
a
father's
death.
The
list
often
included
cousins, uncles, and nephews, or sometimes even included
males from a wife's family, such as her brother or uncle.
The guarantee of male succession of property was coupled
with
a
provision
for
wives
and
children
through
settlement portions, leaving money and settlements, or
jointures,
for
their
legal and
sibling
future
squabbles
support,
alleviating
so prevalent
in
the
previous
centuries.
Wills, still used and still subject to common
law ruling, continued to give wives some power, at least
with personalty, or real money, in their possession.
Jointure replaced dowry as the most common form of
marriage settlement.3
Dowers had come to run as much as
one-third of an estate, an immense amount of money or
land, or both.
Jointures were parcels of land from an
estate set aside for the exclusive ownership of use of a
husband
should
and
her
wife,
husband
with
the
wife
predecease
inheriting
her.
the
land
Jointures
were
usually less than one third of an estate, but they were
stable and provided good income.
implemented in the eighteenth
Strict settlement was
century to preclude the
loss of family property and loss of title through female
inheritors.
It took away the chance that children would
be given portions of an estate, allowing the estate to
lose its mass or be sold off, and thus, lose its wealth,
its power.
How strict settlement worked
within a family was
nearly as important as the settlement itself.
When a
young man came to majority or marriage, he and his father
Spring's introduction in Law, Land and Family to the convolutions
of inheritance practice just prior to and during the eighteenth
century is extensive and provides a coherent, straightforward
discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of all inheritance
practices during the period and the reasoning for their influx and
demise.
would "resettle" the estate.
In other words, they would
both become tenants for life and the true owner would be
the
as-yet-unborn male
child
of
the
son's
marriage.
Father and son were not allowed to sell or trade any of
the land.
If there was no male heir, or if the male heir
passed away before his majority or marriage, the estate
would
fall
to
the
next
closest male
heir
designate.
Sometimes a male heir could be a brother or even the
brother of a wife, or a male cousin, if he had been
incorporated into the succession of heirs at settlement
or resettlement.
The
salient
point
of
strict
settlement and inheritance practices associated with it,
particularly
for this study, was
"perfect" family in mind.
its design with
the
Men would live to majority, be
good husbands and estate managers, and
somehow, would
divine a male heir who would also live to majority.
Men
would marry women of quality and virtue who would bring
land and wealth to the family, and they would produce at
least one healthy male heir.
Though the vast majority of
estates were inherited through "perfect" families, their
"perfectionff was often more a matter of circumstance and
chance
than
of
thoughtful
manipulation.
For
other
families, however, the outcome was often very different,
for many did not fit the specifications needed to have
the
settlement
run
smoothly
while
their
chances
and
circumstances strayed from the profitable, perfect road.
Families,
in
some
cases,
were
ruined
financially,
morally, or socially, and others were raised to great
heights through no merit
of their own.
The law was
whimsical, profitable for some, disastrous for others,
and
the emerging novel often elucidated the drama
of
those families' stories.
Strict
settlement
usually
favored
resettlement
either at majority or marriage rather than at birth. The
probability of producing a son who would reach majority
was not always a given, however.
In the case of Mr.
Bennet in Pride and Prejudice, even majority and marriage
cannot overcome the unknowable.
Habbakukrs definition,
simply put, states that strict settlement is a "series of
arrangements made
most
commonly
when
the
eldest
son
[comes] of age or at his marriage," so the estate was
always
settled
a
husband
could
do
generation
nothing
ahead
with
(2).
the
land
Father
and
once
they
resettled the estate and became life tenants on it.
In
the
at
simplest
case,
when
resettlement
took
place
marriage, the estate was to descend to the eldest son as
tenant in tail, or as tenant with specific restrictions
placed on the estate.
Those restrictions usually would
not allow any part of the estate to be sold during his
lifetime.
Secondly, the settlement empowered the life
tenant to charge the estate with a jointure, or annual
income, for a wife if she should survive her husband,
with a provision for younger children.
Once an eldest
male resettled his estate, his father and he could do
nothing
with
the
estate;
succession called, "in
"entail."
it
had
tail,"
rigid
which
conditions of
eventually became
The line of inheritors was legally bound to
continue to settle or resettle entailed estates.
simple,
or
"tail,"
referred
to
an
estate
Fee
with
no
conditions place on the line of succession (Habbakuk 2).
The land was entailed, charged with a strict and
unchangeable
line
of
succession.
Originally,
Spring
tells us, an entail was a gift of land to a younger child
at majority or marriage
(Law, Land and Family 28).
A
daughter could receive an entail, as common law was not
originally gender specific.
Eventually, in order to keep
estates in the hands of male successors, the effort to
exclude
women
from
inheriting
land
succeeded.
To
preserve large estates through patrilineal means, entails
became perpetual.
thus
come
to
According to Spring,
embody
the
concept
of
"The entail had
land
descending
indefinitely by a mode of succession different from that
of the common law"
(Law, Land
and
Family 28).
This
translates into keeping an estate in the hands of an
eldest male as long as possible, crippling what little
power a daughter may have had to inherit, effectively
eliminating any surety she may have for her future.
Women did have the right to dower, then eventually
to jointure.
Dower is the ancient method of providing
for a wife after the death of her husband.
By the turn
of the eighteenth century, dower often amounted to onethird of an estate (Spring Law, Land and Family 40-41).
It was hers, and in being so, it diminished the mass of
the estate; but as.time passed, a man who wished to marry
and whose estate was held in fee simple, or in fee tail,
found it difficulty to offer a dower, as he often had
every penny tied up in land, and the land was not usually
his to offer.
He found, however, that he could offer a
jointure, or a piece of the estate set aside specifically
for his use and his wife's, owning it jointly.
The widow
would have sole possession of the jointure should her
husband predecease her.
dowries
because
allowed
for
a
they
were
reasonable
through them (42-43).
Jointures eventually replaced
cheaper,
amount
of
and
because
revenue
to
they
flow
Even the simple definitions of inheritance terms and
marriage settlements quickly become more complicated.
understand
marriage
eighteenth-century
and
inheritance,
attitudes
one
must
To
regarding
understand
the
relationship between Englishmen and property, real and
personal, and the indisputable English need to perpetuate
a family estate-a
dynasty.
Louis Namier explains that
"the idea of inalienable property, cherished beyond the
patent value, arises from the land," and that English
businessmen "commuted wealth into property, be it at a
loss
of
economics,
revenue"
and
For
(18-19).
power
mingle
this
reason,
inextricably.
As
land,
the
seventeenth century closed, the ties between land, wealth
and
political
mechanism,
power
unlike
grew
any
into
that
a
had
powerful
come
cultural
before.
The
unbounded economic growth in the eighteenth century made
men rich.
Law and legal practices centered on a wealthy,
economically powerfully England.
Raising a Family
The process of becoming powerful in the eighteenth
century was more complicated than amassing a large sum of
money
or
attaining
a
title.
Although
aristocratic
landowners
were
always
in
possession
portion of the national wealth-that
possession
of
the
eighteenth
century
majority
coupled
of
the
better
is, they were is
of
landed
that
landed
estates-the
wealth
with
political power and put a majority of monied wealth into
the hands of the merchant class.
Spring emphasizes that
large
the
English
estate
land
landowners
.
.
.
"owned
[and] formed
greater
the
part
ruling
of
class,
exercising great influence upon law, politics and upon
social manners and ideas" (Law, Land and Family 4-5).
The rise of the merchant and professional classes
made possible the accumulation of land for any and all
who had money or marriage-ability, thus allowing them
access to power.
Once the exclusive birthright of the
aristocracy, landed estates now became symbolic goals for
the immensely wealthy merchant gentry.
Making
money
to
buy
land
was
motivation of the merchant class, but
the
primary
another way
to
enter the aristocratic ranks and estates was to marry
into them.
If the aristocracy was disconcerted about
their lands being bought up by the gentry, they were more
than alarmed at the prospect of the gentry marrying into
their families.
Tension between the two was never far
from the surface and often not very subtly expressed, as
we shall see in the novels that follow.
Unlike most other kingdoms, England is an island
nation; the empire might well be vast, but the motherland
always will be finite.
in most
centuries,
century.
owning
Competition for British soil, as
remained
fierce in
the
eighteenth
However, this century brought new meaning to
land
exclusively
since political power
to
the
aristocracy.
no
longer belonged
Disquieted
by
the
intrusion of less than noble families, the aristocracy
resisted
the
resistance,
assault
as
best
however, was weak;
they
could.
Their
money seemed endlessly
necessary.
The
wealthy, burgeoning merchant
class
found the
easiest and simplest way to get land was to marry into
it.
Merchant
sons
and
daughters
became
experts
in
inheritance practices and settlements, and aristocratic
sons and daughters became objects of marriage.
settlement
made
aggrandizement
settlements,
sure
land
continued
increasing
a
stayed
through
family's
in
Strict
families
jointures
chance
to
and
and
"raise"
itself to a title or to a seat in the House of Commons.
Inheriting Land and Language
Societies readily adopt the language of a dominant
cultural phenomenon.
The language of the computer, for
instance, is an incredible part
century society.
sometimes we
needing
We
of late twenty-first-
"interface" with colleagues, and
feel ourselves "maxed
"downtime"
to
"reboot
out"
our
at our
systems."
jobs,
Words
originally coined and meant for computers are plucked for
use
in
our
acceptance
of
personal
a
new
lives,
language
signaling
for
a
cultural
doing business
and
living, while for many, achieving mastery of the language
becomes a means
for success.
We change meanings and
usages sometimes, and, in the process, we confound the
Our twenty-
message and hamper effective communication.
first-century
example.
scheduling,
use
Once
a
it
now
of
"programming"
term
means
used
the
schedule, as well as the shows.
to
is
an
describe
ability
to
excellent
television
create
the
We program everything,
including our days and emotions in order to master them
and subsequently master others.
In the process, we have
come to understand that television shows can "program"
our children with violence or "program" us to believe
certain views to be politically true and correct.
The
mastery and confusion of inheritance language terms in
the eighteenth century were not very different.
The obsession with land and titles incorporated the
language of contracts, settlements and wills into the
language of the public sphere and the family.
Publicly,
men like Johnson, Burke, Locke and Hume waded into the
discussions of the rights of the merchant class to marry
into
the
aristocracy,
which
they
coupled
with
a
new
relationship between wealth and political stability and
future growth.
As Spring tells us, landowners and their
families were overtaken by the discussion of estates and
settlements (Law, Land and Family 144-146).
Public and
private discussions allowed the language of inheritance
to become powerful and integral.
Money
and
land were
marriage and virtue.
inheritance
made
for
difficult
to
extricate
from
Heightened interest in land and
heightened
standards of a future wife.
interest
in
virtuous
To ensure proper bloodlines,
conduct books and standards of virtue for unmarried women
abounded, and their language, too, was thrown into the
public mix.
One's
marriage was more about "raising a
family" in the sense of gaining a title than about having
children.
A marriage that was "settled" was more one in
which
contractual
the
agreements
of
jointure
and
pin
money were affixed rather than a man and a woman agreeing
to marry.
Today, we "settle" a divorce, which is still
the apportionment of money and land.
In order to marry into a parcel of land, one had to
conform to the rules of aristocratic marriage.
practices
involved
marriageable
the
women.
virtue
Spring
and
tells
Marriage
qualifications
us
that
qualifications were so important, portions,
a
of
womanf s
(parcels of
land being tantamount to money), became synonymous with
fortune in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries (Law,
Land and Family 172-173).
Purity and innocence were female necessities.
James Thompson points out,
As
"Despite transformation from
status to contract, and shifts from dower to jointure,
the legal system continued to figure the female as a
conduit through which property passes from one male to
another" (156). To become a "conduit," a young woman had
to be
"virtuous,"
political
body
to
a
standard set by
ensure
pure
the male
bloodlines
and
socioproper
succession in inheritance.
Although
primogeniture
protecting
inherit.
women
and
the
were
strict
rights
of
"conduits"
settlement
the
of
were
eldest
male
marriage,
legal
acts
child
to
Females were nearly excluded from the brokerage
of their futures, while the development of the language
of settlements, jointures and inheritance flourished and
became
commonplace,
the
"new
realistic
novel,"
described by
Samuel Johnson in the Rambler.
asserts
the
that
novel
creates
real-life
as
Johnson
situations,
keeping "young, ignorant and idle readers" from falling
into traps in real life
(176-177).
Inheritance novels
produced during this period do just that.
They teach
young readers the pitfalls of marriage, settlements, and
inheritance and help save them from disastrous fates.
The
language
inheritance
society,
became
and
the
of
settlements,
commonplace
"new
in
jointures
upper-class
realistic
novel"
and
English
used
the
experiences of everyday life and its language to "exhibit
life in its true state" (177).
Life in its true state
would include discussions of inheritance and examples of
good and bad settlements.
Johnson's reflections on the
verisimilitude of characters and experiences in novels
would certainly lead the modern reader to believe that
much of what is played out in the early novel deals with
real life.
Johnson inaugurates an argument about fiction
and reality, proposing that a novel "with no historical
veracity"
should
exhibit
the
"most
perfect
idea
virtue, of virtue not angelical, nor above probability
of
.
. .
but the highest and purest that humanity can reach"
to teach us ultimately "what we can hope, and what we can
perform"
at
are
(178).
very
The standards of virtue Johnson hints
much
at
inheritance practice.
the
center
of
marriage
and
Not all early novels are about
inheritance and children poised to inherit, but situated
among them is a small group of novels deeply influenced
by the real life language and practice of inheritance.
Affirmations and Applications
Perhaps the urge to apply the more intricate legal
aspects of eighteenth-century life to literature began
with Lawrence Stone's 1977 publication of Family, Sex and
Marriage
regarding
in
English
inheritance
1500-1800.
practices
Stone's
and
strict
conjectures
settlement
brought a flurry of criticism from such prominent legal
historians as John Habbakuk and Randolph Trumbach.
Among
others, David Sugarman and Eileen Spring soon followed,
finding flaws in not only Stone, but also in his early
critics.
Wrangling over legal issues made a distinct
impression on literary scholars, and although a growing
number of literary studies explore the many applications
of inheritance law and practice in the eighteenth century
culture, this is the first study to analyze the effects
of that practice and language on the eighteenth-century
novel.
The predicament of a young woman involved in the
inheritance structure of her family developed early in
eighteenth-century literature and continued to grow as an
important
aspect
of
plot.
Thompson
suggests,
"From
Pamela to Amelia to Evelina to Emma, the question each
narrative
explores
suitable, valuable"
is what
(22).
makes
the
heroine
worthy,
Nancy Armstrong and Katherine
Soba Green argue strongly for the value of virtue and a
womanfs worthiness to marry or be successful in real life
as virtue strongly centers itself in early novels.
This
study
with
argues
primogeniture
that
and
marriage,
so
closely
strict settlement
century, was a form of inheritance.
linked
in the eighteenth
After all, women who
were "conduits" for land could not be more closely tied
with inheritance.
Eighteenth-century
economic,
of
inextricably
tied
power.
tie, emphasized by Armstrong
The
to
ownership
political
land
and
was
social
through
the
sexual contract and Green through the marriage contract,
also emphasizes the importance of marriage as an economic
and
commercial
venture
for
families
of
importance.
Merchant
and
professional
families who
wished
to
see
daughters as mistresses of great houses and who wished to
link their
family names
through
a
fought
eagerly
to
sonfs marriage
aristocracy.
for
The
those
to
an
prominent
force behind
of
the
aristocracy
aristocratic daughter
positions
strict
among
the
settlement was
dynastic ambition, or as Habbakuk tells us,
"desire to
keep the family estate intact in the hands of the family
for as long as possible
. . .
or, in short, to establish
a dynasty" (51).
The unparalleled devotion to dynastic ambition by
aristocrats and non-aristocratic businessmen, lawyers and
families contributed to the power of the House of Commons
and
the
politicization
of
domestic
energies.
practices underpinned this ambition and was
profoundly
important
their positions.
keep
and
to
families
involved
Legal
therefore
in
raising
However, while families endeavored to
enlarge
their
estates,
society
was
also
beginning to recognize the importance of individual will.
The
confusion that
philosophies
language.
resulted from
manifested
itself
this
in
a
competition of
confusion
of
In his Essay Concerninq Human Understandinq,
John Locke, the undisputed conscience of his age, defines
individual will as:
This power which the mind has thus to order the
Considerations of any idea, of the forbearing
to consider it, or to prefer the motion of an
part of the body to its rest, and vice versa,
in any particular instance.
(123)
The ideal of collective conscience or the collective will
that
had
dominated
political
and
cultural
life
for
centuries was giving way to individual conscience and a
need for each man to find his place in the world.
The new emphasis on individuality certainly worked
its way into the political and legal practices of the
day.
At its inception, strict settlement was a marriage
practice, the public act of incorporating two families.
Wills,
on
the
other
hand,
were
secretive and individual in nature.
entire
social
class
was
able
to
private
contracts,
A community or an
speculate
about
a
marriage settlement, but only a family could justifiably
speculate about
the
member's
Stone argues that individualism in the
will.
contents
eighteenth century meant
a
of
an
"growing
individual
family
introspection" as
much as a demand for personal autonomy, but both these
ideas
had
to
fit
within
the
limits
set
cohesion, especially within the family (151).
for
social
The importance of a will in terms of inheritance and
the importance of claiming individual will confused the
connotations of both terms.
The confusion caused tension
within
tension
families, and
several early novels.
that
reflects
itself
in
Clarissa Harlowe, Evelina Anville
and Elizabeth Bennet exemplify the connotative tension
between
inheritance
and
individual
will.
Clarissa
achieves economic independence through property willed
her by her grandfather and, in doing so, threatens the
male
political
establishment of
her
family.
Evelina
Anville is "inherited" by Mr. Villars, who, through his
individual will, denies the existence of her true social
position and inheritance.
Elizabeth Bennet is the victim
of an entail that saddles her family with the unenviable
task of marrying five daughters into the best possible
positions, knowing all the while that the Bennet name
will
disappear.
convenient match,
She,
however,
choosing
refuses
to make
her
to
make
a
own marriage,
which, in the long run, is far beyond what she could have
hoped would be arranged by her father and family.
The reasonable expectations of young women were that
they would marry as their parents wished. Christopher
Hill, describing the times of Clarissa Harlowe, points
out
that,
"So
long as parents'
main
criterion
for a
successful marriage
was
expressed
in
terms
of money,
property and rank, daughters continued to be treated as
valuable commoditiesf1 (69). One would assume that strict
settlement affected the father-son relationship more than
it did other familial ties.
Strict settlement, however,
was specific in spelling out the duties of fathers and
sons.
Unforeseen circumstances usually affected wives
and daughters, as we shall see in the following chapters.
Female
roles
concerning
"conduit"
usually
jointure
for
remained
or
land.
dower
Men's
undefined,
and
a
roles
woman's
were
except
role
economic
as
and
political; women's were domestic and silent.
Randolph Trumbach believes that strict settlement's
most important function in the eighteenth century was to
"balance the claims of family continuity and greatness,"
embodied
in the person
of
the eldest
son, against a
satisfactory provision for younger children and wives,
mediating
the
conflicting
patrilineage (70).
the
law
was
so
claims
of
kindred
and
Further, John Zomchick asserts that
deeply
engaged
with
individual
and
commercial life of the eighteenth century that it was one
of
the
few
"common
points
of
identification
in
a
collective that otherwise establishes strong ideological
barriers between public and private life" (2).
Zomchick connects
language
to
the
literature,
importance of
claiming
law
and
its
eighteenth-century
novelists could "no more imagine character without law
than they can imagine a society without conflicts" (2).
Accordingly,
James
function with
dissimilar
Thompson
their
to
own
the
points
out
"thematization
questions
political economists" (21).
of
that
of
value
novels
value,
that
not
occupy
One can go further, however,
and claim that inheritance law and its language combine
with
literature
in
the
eighteenth
century,
allowing
novels to adopt the language of inheritance law and use
its power to fuel plots of several novels.
provides
literature
a
new
in
the
instrument
through
This study
which
eighteenth century and
to
beyond,
view
one
opened by Zomchick and Thompson and brought clearly into
the light through this study.
Within the three novels discussed in this study,
strict
settlement on
affect males.
exception.
the
surface, does
not
adversely
Mr. Bennet of Pride and Prejudice is our
Once
a
deviation
from
the
norm
occurs,
however, the results overtly settle on females, providing
a context for action in the story.
the
case
of
Mr.
Bennet,
for
This is even true in
he
followed
standard
procedure
and
could
not
daughters and no sons.
family.
John
Frow
foresee
the
birth
of
five
The settlement affects the entire
effectively
summarizes
results
of
such forces stating:
[Slocial structure can be thought in terms of a
play
of
constraints,
determinations,
restrictions exercised upon
each
and
other by
a
range of semiotic practices and institutions as
the complex convergence of forces at one time.
(60).
The convergence of strict settlement with primogeniture
during a century that saw merchant-class families able to
use it as a social and political tool helped to produce a
body of literature highlighting its "complex forces."
Clarissa, Evelina and Pride and Prejudice provide
different views of how inheritance disrupts families and
women and how it plays upon the characters within the
novels to displace or disturb the heroines.
Language the
characters use often forces the heroine to misread others
or make dangerous decisions.
Language sometimes forces
characters to reach outside cultural norms for solutions.
Richardsonfs
Clarissa
inheritance language.
A
is
a
novel
matchless
of
example
family deceit
of
and
outrageous male behavior, the characters, action and plot
are motivated by strict settlement.
Richardson provides
his readers with a view of the seamy side of eighteenthcentury settlements on
wives,
daughters
and
aunts
by
eldest sons driven by dynastic ambition.
He emphasizes the dangers wealthy single men pose
toward marriageable young ladies while prowling for a
wife among them.
James Harlowe, Jr., usurps his fatherfs
authority over Clarissa, forcing her to comply with his
personal wishes.
Authority
over
daughters, including
their marriage settlements, had been the jurisdiction of
fathers
until
Daughters
their
were
fathers
discipline.
Clarissa
grandfather.
the
mid-eighteenth
precious
and
century
commodities,
subject
to
their
(Green 3).
"conduits"
for
scrutiny
and
In Clarissa, however, this is not true.
Harlowe
inherits
a
dairy
from
her
This loving gesture, a secret until his
death, sets in motion a series of devastating events.
Clarissa, with her inheritance, is now able to make her
own decisions about marriage.
She is also able to live
beyond the jurisdiction of her family.
intolerable for a
This would be
family determined to acquire enough
money and property to be conferred a title and a seat in
Parliament.
Sadly, their interests lie in her property
and in her as property, not in her personally, which, in
the end, is partly responsible for her death.
group of men drives the plot of Clarissa.
hatred
for women
merchant
class,
and
a deep
minor
Fueled with
suspicion of
aristocrat
A small
Robert
the rising
Lovelace
is
determined to keep the privileges of the nobility out of
non-aristocratic hands.
In doing so, he avenges past
slights received from James Harlowe, Jr.
He also makes
as many women as possible pay for the jilting he received
at the hands of a woman who married above him.
most
dangerous,
however,
because
his
He is
power
and
independence, derived through his inheritance of a vast
estate
at
an
early
age,
authority and discipline.
not hereditary.
make
him
invulnerable
to
His uncle's title, however, is
In order to be eligible for it, Lovelace
must amass as much wealth and property as possible.
Lovelace's
nemesis,
James
Harlowe,
driven by the power invested in land.
to rectify his grandfather's
will.
Jr.,
also
is
He angrily tries
The tension created
by the needs of both young men disrupts and distorts
their impetus and ability to communicate effectively and
honestly with Clarissa and
the rest of
the Harlowes.
Most importantly, their own language forces silence on
others normally
in
authority.
Clarissa's
father and
mother should have been able to decide about Clarissa's
inheritance rather than James, Jr., and Lord M.
have had more
manipulated;
control over Robert Lovelace.
their
language
is
confounded
should
All are
by
strict
for
young
settlement power.
Virtue,
unmarried
the
women,
personal
had
standard
special
meaning
set
for
heroines.
Virtue meant avoidance of fault, putting the heroine in a
passive position and making virtue a suffering, or making
her suffer the faults of others (Alliston 83). How true
for poor Clarissa.
her own will,
the
Her death heightens the importance of
steeped in legal language and certainly
centerpiece of
the
novel's
denouement.
Even
in
death, Clarissa cannot escape the language of inheritance
as she wills away those few things she has left in the
world.
The irony of having Clarissals story framed by
written
wills
and
driven by
her
independent will
is
extraordinary.
Evelina, on the other hand, is based on a "nonexistent" will, as there is a "non-existent" marriage.
Public sentiment and common law can do nothing for our
heroine without a written document.
In order for Evelina
Anville to recapture her real name and her status as a
worthy inheritor, she must produce or have produced for
her a document proving her identity.
For
all
the
recent
criticism
dealing
with
the
importance of names and naming in Burney's
novel, Sir
Louis
name
Namier
reminds
us
that
although
a
is
a
"weighty symbol," it is "liable to variations; descent
Namier declares the
traced in the male line only" (19).
estate becomes the family identification, implying that
the length and greatness of a family, as a name often
changes.
to
Primogeniture and entails help psychologically
preserve
successive
the
family
generations,
and
its
thereby
position
fixing
a
through
conscious
identification through succession rather than name (20).
This
language
is
the
in
searching
ultimately
competitive
Evelina.
for
her
Though
identity
find her
nature
relation to his estate.
Evelina
and
father and
of
inheritance
may
well
be
her
name,
she
must
prove
her
lineage
in
Further, Evelina is not the only
character influenced by inheritance.
The veracity and
sincerity of Mr. Villars are affected, as well.
He, of
all people, should be versed in titles and inheritance.
Through
the
movement
of
silencing of Mr. Villars,
identity through her
the
plot
and
the
effective
Evelina is able to realize her
marriage
to
Lord
Orville.
His
decision to have her as his wife before he knows her
identity asserts the relative unimportance of her name
and the underlying power of her inherited birthright and
breeding.
Mrs. Selwyn joins Villars in being instrumental to
the
inheritance machine
of
Evelina.
Villars
suffers
under the settlement reserved for second sons, but the
legacy left her through her husband's
empowers Mrs. Selwyn.
jointure and will
Sir John Belmont finds his real
daughter and restores Evelina to her rightful place as
heiress.
Burney's
implication
is
that
rights
of
succession will continue no matter what the hidden name,
as
long as
the
true
inheritor is not prevented
from
acting.
Writing at the beginning of the nineteenth century,
Jane
Austen
balances
earlier
efforts
at
exposing
injustices of inheritance with the struggles of Mr. and
Mrs. Bennet to marry off their five daughters in face of
an entail on the Bennet estate.
Not only is Austen aware
of the problems inherent in strict settlement, but she
also uses her literary skill to harness the power of its
inheritance language, allowing it to be the driving force
in Pride and Prejudice.
Austen was caught in a real-life
web of inheritance settlements.
father,
their
After the death of her
she and her mother and sisters were dependent on
brothers
and
close
male
relatives
for
their
welfare.
Although several of her brothers went on to
become titled and inheritors of large estates,
Austen
was aware of the mercenary nature of inheritance, placing
females of her family in so vulnerable a position once
their male provider (her father) passed away (Perry 47).
Austen
does
not
Richardson and Burney.
give
us
an
heiress,
unlike
She gives us, instead, a bevy of
daughters incapable of inheriting an estate, strapped by
a lack of good portions to enhance their chances for good
marriages.
Eileen
Spring
explains
the
Bennet
legal
situation:
The entail that Mr Bennet never ceased to rail
bitterly against was a strict settlement.
By
the date of Jane Austenfs story, had it been a
simple entail, Mr. Bennet could have ended it
at any time. That he could not do so is the
starting point for the story.
Austen
also
incorporates
into
her
(33)
novel
positions of members of the middle class.
the
varying
Mr. Wickham,
Mr. Collins and the Lucases all depend on inheritance and
marriage
settlements
to
enhance
their
lives.
The
Bingleys, on the other hand, are nouveau riche, with each
of them displaying a range of attitudes toward the power
of their wealth.
Mr. Bingley takes his cue from Darcy,
displaying all the good things wealth can bring.
Miss
Bingley, however, wishes to cement her own position in
the upper classes by marrying Darcy, a move that would
make her future more secure and less dependent on her
brother.
Her brother's
wealth brings him to a great
estate in Meryton and gives her the power of a large
portion, making her attractive as a marriage prospect for
the
nobility.
Without
a
substantial portion,
Miss
Bingley' s future would have been tenuous, equal to that
of any of the Bennet girls.
Mr. Collins need not do anything, for his penchant
for being in the right place at the right time will bring
him wealth, an excellent living, and Longbourn.
gives
us
the
laughable
prospect
of
a
Austen
plodding,
unattractive, dull and unlikable minor cleric rising to
the top of society.
Noble bloodlines run cold at the
thought of Mr. Collins moving among them.
Richardson, Burney and Austen present readers with
anomalies of
inheritance law, an occurrence
seemingly
overlooked by the legal community and unspoken of in the
daily language of marriage and inheritance.
Clarissa,
Evelina and Elizabeth represent young women exhibiting
the newly fashionable independent will of the eighteenth
century.
The curious combination of a subversive legal
language and a feminine independence provides the "young,
ignorant and the idle" with
a reasonable idea of the
expectations and pitfalls that can occur when life does
not follow a "perfect model." Inheritance
eighteenth-century novels was
cultural expectations.
at
language
odds with
in
social and
The tension it caused helped to
redefine the vocabulary of the age.
It highlighted the
precariousness of life for females in rich and landed
families.
It modeled
expectations
and
solutions
for
events arising in the daily disruptions of family life.
Richardson provides a novel
greed and inheritance.
and
of
personal,
as
about the consequences of
Burney gives a story of deception
well
as
social
greed.
Austen,
employing the unforeseeable and unexpected, incorporates
both.
Conclusion
Strict settlement and primogeniture were the forces
behind the search for land and title in the eighteenth
century.
The language and practices of inheritance and
marriage settlements found their way into newly emerging
novels.
The
central
force
power
behind
of
inheritance
the
plots
of
is
sometimes
early
novels
the
and
exhibits itself in several ways.
Subverted language and
the rigid effects of strict settlement subject female
protagonists
to
communication
a
loss
with
of
proper
meaningful
guardians
or
and
truthful
mentors.
Characters find their voices stifled by the language of
those
empowered
prospect of it.
of
inheritance,
by
inheritance
or
overwhelmed
by
the
Their plots, founded on various aspects
are
driven
by
its
consequences.
Clarissa, Evelina and Pride and Prejudice fully represent
a new genre, the inheritance novel.
Chapter Two
Unhappy Transactions: Richardson's Clarissa and
Strict Settlement
Introduction
Samuel Richardson's
Clarissa is the quintessential
inheritance novel of the eighteenth century.
The growing
body of criticism directed toward this novel's
on land and
family highlights the
emphasis
foibles and often-
inhumane outcomes of strict settlement and inheritance
dominating Richardson's
lifetime and revealing anew the
true tragedy beneath the demise of Clarissa Harlowe.
The
power of inheritance, signaled through the power of its
language,
is
overwhelming
in
Clarissa,
and
the
plot
thrives on these very factors.
Clarissa
characterize
directly
exemplifies
an
involved
inheritance
with
the
the
three
novel.
language
factors
Richardson
and,
often,
that
is
the
practice of strict settlement through his own experiences
and work.
He exhibits exquisite control of the language
within the novel and shows a profound knowledge not only
of the broad interpretations of inheritance practice, but
also of the contrary nuances often accompanying day-today inconsistencies in families that would pose potential
problems for smooth inheritance.
The
majority
of
characters
in
control of the language of inheritance.
Clarissa
are
in
Many of them are
capable of manipulating the strict settlement system and
its partner, marriage settlement.
Clarissa must use or
manipulate the language of inheritance, which she does
very well from the beginning, in order to attempt to gain
of power over her future.
brother
and
Lovelace,
language; they use
Other characters, like her
are
already
the laws of
in
control
of
the
strict settlement and
marriage practice to silence Clarissa her parents and
others who could support her, even save her from harm.
Clarissa
also
centers
on
its
heroine's
ability
to
"inherit," a term that becomes, within the context of
each separate inheritance plot, a subversive and slippery
term not only for her, but also for those who work for
and against her.
Discussing the
century
literature
inheritance law in the eighteenth
must
begin
with
a
discussion
of
Clarissa.
Richardson's masterpiece recounts a litany of
realistic implications and consequences gleaned from the
proliferation of land-based estate settlements.
also
realistically
characterized
English
Clarissa
belief
that
primogeniture, the rule of assigning land to the eldest
male child in a family in some form was more judicious
for estate planning than wills.
The effect of the law on
society and literature came late to critical attention.
The
late
twentieth
century
has
seen
only
a
very
few
studies whose foci are on law and literature.
Of these few, John Zomchick has written extensively
regarding
civil law and
century society.
exemplify
interpret
its prominence
Zomchick uses portions of Clarissa to
society's
eighteenth-century
and
understanding
specifically
in eighteenth-
apply
legal codes and
their
social
Clarissa's
ability
laws,
while
implications.
arrest
and
night
He
in
to
also
cites
custody,
using that incident to note how Mrs. Sinclair and her
girls use the law against Clarissa in order to malign her
further.
Zomchick
also
clarifies
the
psychological
effect of this language on Clarissa and its effect on the
reader.
He
into
her
inheritance problems, as those laws are different
from
civil codes.
does
not
venture,
however,
Family and the law in eighteenth-century
fiction is an excellent jumping off place to begin a
study of the effect of law on society, and hence, its
literature.
April London and Joan Schwarz are two other notable
authors who explore Clarissa in the context of females
and property law and females and rape law, respectively.
London specifically deals with civil law and economics
and
their
application
to
women
of
property
in
the
eighteenth century, while Schwarz applies contemporary
rape laws to the case of Clarissa Harlowe.
premise
surmises
that,
"relations
of
London' s
property
to
personality are as fundamental in Clarissa as they were
to the culture in which the novel was written"
Schwarz, on
the
other
hand,
asserts
that
(15).
"Richardson
portrayed the power relations immanent in the novel's
social spheref' while at the same time, portraying their
effects on
"Clarissa's
social sphere"
(3).
In other
words, for both London and Schwarz, Richardson provides a
true picture of upper class landed society during his
lifetime.
The same holds for Zomchick, though his study
encompasses only civil law.
these
practices,
however,
His history of the rise of
does
not
directly
inheritance practice, property, or settlement law.
concern
Since Zomchickfs study, Eileen Spring has produced
an impressive body of work clarifying strict settlement,
beginning an intelligible and sensible discussion of its
influence
on
the
early
novel.
However,
Spring's
references to Clarissa are fleeting and given as examples
of,
rather
than
explanations
for,
eighteenth-century literature.
their
influence
on
Still, my study strives
to fill the silence surrounding the early novel and the
influence
inheritance
untouched
even
in
law
the
that
has
been
growing body
of
left
largely
criticism
that
deals with eighteenth-century law.
Richardson and the Language of Settlement
Strict settlement was rigid in its application and
certainly not subject to interpretation, like civil laws
and wills.
While Clarissa Harlowe struggles with
predicament
of
her
settlement,
she
quickly
the
comes
to
realize the civil implications of her plight, revealing
that
she
sometimes
understands
wished
.
distinguished
by
estranged
. . .
me
my
much
about
.
that
grandpapa
"
as
(L2 41).
civil
law:
"I
have
I
had
I
was:
which
has
Clarissa
knows
her
never
been
grandfather's bequest to her is under civil jurisdiction
and not part of the resettlement of his estate.
She
knows that in this realm she is vulnerable to litigation
and lawsuits by her family, a compelling reason for her
willingness to hand the dairy house to her father.
first letter relates to Anna
first came
to Harlowe
Howe that when
Place, she was
Her
Lovelace
"busied
in the
accounts relating to" the dairy house which are "once a
year
left to my
Clarissa
shows a
inspection"
(L2 41-42).
remarkable grasp
of
Thereafter,
the
nuances
of
settlement law, as well, that are applied to her family
and to her own future.
She sharply assesses Solmes and
his fortune:
The upstart man, I repeat, for he was not born
to
the
riches
immense
left
by
riches
one
he
is
niggard
possessed
to
another,
of;
in
injury to the next heir, because that other is
a niggard.
Clarissa's
(L13 81)
knowledge
of
the
law,
both
civil
and
inheritance, will culminate in the intricate legal text
of her final will and testament.
Richardson assumes
knowledgeable
reading
grasps
regarding
population,
the
law
not
the
only
law,
especially
and
the
that
but
his
his
heroine
also
female
often-unkind
that
is
his
audience,
results
of
settlement, a predicament Clarissa soon finds out
herself.
Joan
Schwarz
argues
forcefully
for
regarding
Richardsonfs own knowledge of the law and his assumption
of the legal intelligence of his reading audience.
She
cites numerous legal scholars to establish her audience
awareness of the law, and though one notes there are no
particular
citations
regarding
Richardson knew the law, Schwarz's
case
regarding
his
eighteenth-century
her
understanding
Certainly,
knowledge is vital to his plot.
that
presents a powerful
audience's
law.
assertion
that
of
audience
However, a twentieth-
century audience needs some reasonable explanation and
interpretation of those laws in order to appreciate the
novel in Richardson's original intent.
Richardson, like others cognizant of the power of
legal practices, was able to use the emergent novel genre
as a platform for critiquing strict settlement practice.
Richardsonfs didactic leanings were also at work, and he
would have been eager to reveal the downside of such a
rigid
practice,
using
his
work
as
a
guidepost
for
marriageable youth, warning them to be careful how they
plan for their futures.
Richardson's first title for Clarissa was The Lady's
Leqacy: or, the whole gay and serious compass of the
Human Heart laid open, for the Service of Both Sexes
(Correspondence 77 )
"legacy,"
.
Richardson's
deliberate
use
of
a decidedly legal term, and his stated wish
that this novel be for the guidance and "service of Both
Sexes" attests to his concerns about primogeniture and
strict settlement practice.
Richardson aims to outline
the often-deleterious effects of inheritance practice for
the
edification
of,
as
Samuel
Johnson
calls
them
in
Rambler No. 4, "the young, the idle and the ignorant."
Richardson masterfully challenges the worthiness of
strict settlement,
demonstrating the application of the
law in a myriad of
settlement was
implemented
future of wealthy
accumulated
family situations.
in order
Though strict
to
families and protect
through
inheritance
outcomes were not so successful.
and
stabilize
the
the
land they
marriage,
many
Certainly, Richardson
was not the first to question the ramifications of legal
decision-making,
but
his
fictional
assertions
are
underpinned by a body of non-fictional works he produced
during
his
lifetime that deal with
just
such
issues.
While the law does not heed situations less than perfect,
being
created to prevail
over all
with
the
unseeing,
unblinking eye of equality, Richardson and his literary
contemporaries saw the effects of the law on everyday
life and conjectured within the pages of their novels
what could further happen.
The use of legal language by
the Harlowe men, Lovelace and others, and by Clarissa and
her
friends,
is
a
strong
indicator
of
Richardson's
decision to base Clarissa's story on the aberrant nature
of eighteenth-century inheritance law.
Although strict settlement law itself was clear in
the eighteenth-century, its effect on a family could be
confusing, as it was for the Harlowes, and especially for
Clarissa.
Because Clarissa is confused by the initial
outcome of her grandfatherrs will, her language marks her
confusion.
language
Richardson does not allow enough clarity of
in
judgments,
Richardson' s
any
even
of
his
when
characters
life
itself
observations
of
to
make
depends
society
sound
on
and
it.
its
personalities provide the modern-day reader with a wealth
of detail about how people
adjusted
to
the
blinking
really lived and how they
settlement laws
that
shaped
their lives.
Early in his career, Richardson became the printer
for the Journal of the House of Commons.
1730s,
Richardson
published
"bills,
Starting in the
orders,
and
occasional reports for the House of Commons," a business
that, according to Eaves and Kimpel, grew substantially
during
Commons
the
next
knew
twenty
years
Richardson's
(55-56).
business,
The
and
House
his
of
intimate
relationship with the Speaker contributed, as well, to
his being
chosen to perform
Journals.
Specifically,
the task of printing
the
General
Index
the
to
the
Sessional Papers Printed for the House of Lords shows
that Richardson was the printer for the entire entry of
bills
dealing
with
clandestine marriage
clandestine
bills,
which
marriages.
eventually
The
would
be
made law, dated from their inception in 1739 to their
repeal
in
1765
(112).
Richardson
would
have
been
responsible for all of the printings except the repeal,
which passed four years after his death.
Among
other
bills
dealing
with
inheritance
and
family settlements introduced in the House of Commons and
printed by Richardson in the Journals are the "Devices of
Estates Bill" in 1751, the "Attestation of Wills Bill,"
in 1751, and the "Forfeited Estates in Scotland Bill,"
also introduced in 1751.
of
the
bills
published
dealing
after
These bills, with the exception
with
Clarissa,
clandestine marriage,
but
their
presence
in
were
such
close proximity to its publication indicates a regular
presence of debate and reporting that would have been
included
in
the
compilation
of
the
The
Journal.
Catalogue of Papers Printed by the Order of the House of
Commons for the years encompassing Richardson's printing
includes
laws,
bills
and
dealing
marriage
with
laws.
estate
Thus,
laws,
inheritance
Richardsonfs
close
association with the House of Commons and its Speaker,
along with his familiarity with law and legal language,
situate
him
comfortably
in
the
heart
of
eighteenth-
century inheritance practice and marriage settlement.
William
Sale
explores
other
publications
that
Richardson was involved with, and the list is long and
varied regarding the subject of the law.4
according
to
Sale,
published
One pamphlet,
anonymously
in
1753,
includes Richardsonfs own sentiment that "all men
beasts of prey" (Master Printer 203).
Richardsonfs
association
with
both
are
Sale also mentions
Tory
and
Whig
periodical publications, which enhanced his ambivalence
toward
his
own
class,
an
ambivalence
that
had
its
ultimate expression, according to Sale, in the tensionfilled relationship between Clarissa and Robert Lovelace
Richardson was responsible for the printing and publications of
many private books and pamphlets dealing with marriage, estates and
inheritance practice. Sale details the nature and titles of these
books in Samuel Richardson: Master Printer. The lengthy list of
these titles only adds to the conviction that Richardson was well
versed in the language, structure, and application of inheritance
law.
(Master
printing
35) .
Printer
both
sides
Richardson's
of
political
participation
issues
of
his
in
day
affected his personal reflections on society, according
to
Sale.
If
this
is
true, then
one
can
reasonably
extrapolate that his printing of the Journals with their
inclusions of inheritance laws also affected his personal
reflections regarding those matters.
Richardson was aware of the effect of inheritance
practices
in
daily
life.
He
was
sensitive
to
the
opinions of women of his own class and of the nobility.
He would have been concerned and involved with the lives
of
his
daughters
corresponded
with
and
with
him.
He
regarding his writing.
Richardson
"practiced
the
young
solicited
women
their
who
advice
Eaves and Kimpel point out that
the
art
of
making
his
events
convincing in terms of the fiction itself, though he also
adhered to the more
conventional doctrine of realism,
portraying only events which could easily have occurred
in everyday life"
such
a
body
of
(238).
legal
Ultimately, one cannot print
texts,
especially
important
documents that needed careful attention to detail like
the Journals, without becoming intimately involved with
the subject matter.
The eighteenth-century reading public was the same
middle and upper class that would have been involved with
estates and settlements and the burgeoning wealth of the
merchant class.
Further proof of the public nature of
the problems of inheritance and class and the strains
placed
on
the
Richardson's
virtue
of
young
women
is
provided
in
early publications of Familiar Letters, at
least three of which are developed later in Clarissa
(Eaves and Kimpel 98).
Richardson began on the lower fringe of the middle
class and rose to the top of it.
the
restrictions
placed
He knew the gentry and
between
classes.
He
was
a
typical member of the hardworking middle class, and in
being so, his ideas and beliefs are representative of the
public
body
of
discourse
in
the
eighteenth
century,
including those of virtue and inheritance law (Eaves and
Kimpel passim).
moral precepts,
From law to politics to love, family and
Richardsonfs position in his culture
made him privy to the arguments, resolutions, and popular
thinking that dominated public discussion and political
debate,
all
of
which
culminate
in
his
masterpiece,
Clarissa.
Thus,
the chaos in the Harlowe
Grandfather Harlowe's
"uncomfortable"
family caused by
will,
along with
James,
Jr . ' s
empowerment
represent Richardson's
through
his
inheritance,
conclusions about the reality of
inheritance practice.
Exemplifying Johnson's
claim in
Rambler No. 4 that novels tell stories about what is real
or realistic and are about "real" people, Clarissa is
able to provide lessons about expectations and events
that
"one
can
reasonably
expect
to
happen
in
these
and
plots
circumstancesff (Thompson 11).
Constructing Clarissa
Inheritance
novels
generate
characters
rich in the language of inheritance practice and marriage
settlements.
Inheritance language finds its way into the
language of characters and, in turn, characters often
become so glib with it they are able to manipulate the
language to their own ends.
Crucial to the plot
of
Clarissa, Clarissa's legal acumen intrudes into the first
lines of the novel.
Both she and her confidante, Anna
Howe, speak easily and knowledgeably about the will's
content
and
the
events
Harlowe's directives.
subsequent
to
Grandfather
The will opens the novel and sets
events in motion that will eventually lead Clarissa to
tragedy.
At the end of her story, Richardson closes with
Clarissa's
civil
own will,
documents.
privately
court.
framing the plot with
Both
written
and
wills
are
subject to
legal and
subjective
texts,
interpretation by
a
Unlike strict settlement, whose rules are public
and binding once set in motion, individuals, through a
last will and testament, were able to exercise personal
prerogatives in secret regarding, among many things, who
should inherit what of their estates.
While the body of
the novel deals with strict settlement and the impersonal
transition of property through a strictly regulated set
of rules, individuality and personal preference frame the
novel.
two.
Richardson makes clear a distinction between the
In the process, then, "will" becomes one of the
novel's pivotal, slippery words, for its multiplicity of
meanings superimpose themselves in nearly every instance
of their use, confusing the reader and resisting any one
interpretations.
"father,
If
Further,
words
such
"mother, "
as
and "friend" take on extra meanings.
Clarissa
confuses Lovelace as she lies dying, telling him she will
be reconciled with her "father."
is speaking of
her
real
Lovelace concludes she
father, while
speaking of her Father in Heaven.
she really is
"Mother" also becomes
resistant to one definition, for Clarissa's
real mother
is silenced, as is her surrogate mother, Mrs. Norton.
The bawdy Mrs. Sinclair is a housemother to her girls and
Clarissa, while Clarissa herself is a mother to those
involved in her Poor Fund.
Toni Bowers elaborates this
point, asserting that "nearly all the adults in the novel
are, in some sense, Clarissa's parents, and one of the
heroine's
main problems is that she has altogether too
many parental figures to answer to" (213).
Her brother
becomes her father, while Lovelace plays to her need for
a guardian and savior, the heroic male who ironically
presages Christ as her ultimate guardian and savior.
Once the novel presents Grandfather Harlowe's will,
the letters that follow between Anna Howe and Clarissa
catalogue the inheritances of Clarissa and her brother
and sister, all the while detailing the decline of the
Harlowe family happiness as each member reacts to the
conditions set out
wishes.
through
Grandfather Harlowe's
last
James, Jr., moves to control Clarissa and her
legacy through his plot to have her marry Solmes.
He
sees the marriage as an ironclad way to accumulate the
land and wealth he needs to acquire his title.
Clarissa
shares her shrewd assessment of the family's dealing with
Solmes:
"
. . .
now a possibility is discovered (which
such a grasping mind as my brother's can easily turn into
a probability) that my grandfather's
estate will revert
to
. . ."
[the Solmes marriage settlement]
(L13 81).
Richardson paints the Harlowes as a typical eighteenthcentury
merchant
transitioning
aspiring
family,
from
to minor
Clarissa's
acquisitive
merchant
class
aristocracy.
and
to
He
expanding,
landed
gentry,
explains,
through
letters, the practice of giving portions, or
money, instead of dowers to young women of marriageable
age,
thus
paternal
cutting
estate
down
that
the
would
amount
be
of
given
land
into
from
the
a marriage
settlement.
Dowers usually incorporated any land not entailed,
and even some that was.
of
dowered
land.
Portions were money paid in lieu
Richardson
also
subtly
introduces
jointure, the giving of a parcel of land, usually through
the husband's
estate, that becomes the property of the
husband and wife jointly, and which will become the sole
property of the survivor of the marriage and not subject
to the laws of strict settlement.
who
conjectures
"probabilities"
of
about
the
arrangements
Unlike her brother,
"possibilities"
to
be
made,
and
Clarissa
implies that he is erroneously hoping for something that
she will not allow to occur.
Superficially, Grandfather Harlowers will, a private
and individual civil document, appears to have allowed
personal sentiment to overtake more modern restrictions
strict settlement would have placed on his property.
He
chose the old practice of writing a personal will
in
order to have his specific wishes carried out.
Had he
allowed strict settlement to deal with his entire estate,
then his estate would have gone to his eldest son, while
money, personalty, or property not part of the estate,
including stocks, bonds and chattel, would have gone to
younger
sons
and
daughters.
The
sentimentality, however, is just that.
appearance
of
Modern readers
must understand that toward the end of the seventeenth
century many
wealthy
merchants
began
to
settle their
estates in the same manner as the aristocracy, because
money, whenever gained through business, could easily be
lost.
Substantial and unforeseen changes made a civil
will granting money to heirs of little or no value should
market shifts take a downward turn.
civil wills
were
undependable,
At the very least,
since litigation could
easily overturn personal wishes in a civil court.
settlement was
succession
was
not
subject to litigation.
unblinking;
it
deals
with
Strict
Its rigid
land,
a
commodity rarely unstable, no matter what occurred in the
marketplace (Thirsk 183) .
Grandfather
Harlowe
was
one
of
many
wealthy
merchants who settled his estate in the manner of wills
and estate planning that overlapped strict settlement's
implementation.
Therefore,
Grandfather
Harlowe
leaves
the rules of strict settlement to the young and wills his
estate as he sees fit, including willing his dairy house
to
Clarissa,
observes,
which
assertion
favorite
"giving
Grandfather
upon
his
wealth
grandchild.
as
a
Harlowe undermines
Harlowe
Place
token
Victor
of
affection,
the hierarchical
stands"
ground
While
(6).
is true, Lam unfortunately
Lam
his
goes on to also
observe :
[Grandfather
instructs
Harlowe' s]
his
sons
incoherent
to
obey
will
patriarchal
convention by obeying his father's will, at the
same
time
that
he
violates
the
rules
for
inheritance of property with the set purpose of
turning
his
Grandfather
wealth
Harlow
into
employs
a
token
of
love.
the
language
of
compulsion when he commands his
sons not
to
"impugn or contest" his Will. (7)
Lam's
assertions
are
erroneous
Harlowe' s will and its purpose.
regarding
Grandfather
As Eileen Spring points
out, the founders of families naturally made settlements
by will, and "few self-made men [were] ready to give up
their power over their property while they lived" (Law,
Land and Family 129).
The will itself enumerates the
business of the family.
India
traffic,"
They were involved in "East
and
"successful
"unexpected benefits from
voyages,"
with
. . . new-found mines," and
most importantly, Grandfather Harlowe points out that the
men
have
"marriage
portions
of
their
own"
(L4 53).
Little or no real estate seems to have been involved in
the
initial making
Harlowe
side.
of
this
family, at
Therefore,
Lamfs
least
on
assertion
the
that
Grandfather Harlowe's will was "incoherent" and "violates
the
rules
for
inheritance
of
property"
cannot
be
justified in light of the legal possibilities of the day;
many wealthy merchants settled their estates in much the
same way.
The majority of the estate fell to the hands
of
Harlowe,
James
of
strict
settlement.
Grandfather Harlowe knew the men
in his
family
enough
well
Jr.,
to
through
know
they
the
act
would
contest
any
individual will that gave away land that could feasibly
be used to "raise the family."
that,
historically,
Spring goes on to explain
primogeniture
meant
to
have
the
eldest male child inherit land if there was an eldest
male child.
However, in the case of a family only having
a daughter or daughters, or in the case of other children
surviving beyond
the
eldest male,
then
estates
often
could be settled with much bequeathed for daughters and
younger children, including realty that was not in tail
(an estate that was not "in tail" had no restrictions on
who could inherit it).
The implementation of the laws
of primogeniture and strict settlement did not have to
involve a civil will (Law, Land and Family 17-22).
For centuries, civil wills had not been fashionable
among the landed classes, but as middle and upper class
families began to accumulate money as well as land, wills
became important once again, since inheritance laws for
land did not include provision for personalty (money) in
their jurisdiction unless the money in question was for
marriage settlement and portions.
The re-emergence of the civil will in the eighteenth
century
gave
to
landed
gentry
and
aristocracy
an
advantage to leave what they liked to whom they liked as
long as the terms did not interfere with the settlement
of the landed estate (Spring Law, Land and Family 12-15,
129).
changing
The
newness of Harlowe Place and
customs
for
settlement
Harlowe to do as he wished.
allowed
the
rapidly
Grandfather
Willing The Grove did not
interfere with his main estate settlement and therefore,
though
it
was
"unconformable,"
eighteenth-century penchant
or
for
not
strict
in
line
with
settlement
for
realty, Grandfather Harlowe' s will was legal and binding.
His sons and grandson, however, were modern eighteenthcentury
men.
They,
therefore,
opposed
the
elder
Harlowe' s refusal to entirely give up past practices.
Private wills meant
private betrayal
in
the
form
of
"surprise" giving, and, in the Harlowes' case, the chance
of public embarrassment.
As Anna Howe reminds Clarissa,
"People, I have heard you say, who affect secrets always
excite curiosity" (L10 70) .
Clarissa has chosen to live a single life before the
novel begins
(L438 1268).
Her
grandfatherfs
would give her enough income to remain single.
bequest
However,
as Miguel Suarez observes, "[a]utonomous adulthood, the
freedom to choose and act in a unfettered way, is a
masculine entitlement only"
(80).
Clarissa writes her
uncle John that by her offering to "engage not to marry
at all,"
she is disgraced, sequestered from company and
banished from her mother and father (L32.l 149) .
same
letter,
marriage:
Clarissa
"To be
gives
given up
a
chilling
In the
account
to a strange man;
of
to be
engrafted into a strange family; to give up her very
name,
as
a
mark
of
dependent property
Suarez,
Clarissa' s
her
becoming
. . ."
his
absolute
(L32.1 148) .
understanding
of
and
According
marriage
as
to
"no
domain for female autonomy" is disturbingly correct (80).
Katherine Green asserts that, ideally, a woman inhabited
a dependent space within a male territory so that she
never
became
a
litigant
or
head
of
household
(3).
Inheriting the dairy house made her both, and that was
unacceptable to her brother.
Clarissa tried valiantly to
uphold the male patriarchal custom by giving her father
control
and
later, by
refusing Anna
urgings to sue Lovelace and her parents.
Howe's
in
of her property,
the
end,
Clarissa's
independent
will
However,
and
her
inheritance so disrupted the language of inheritance in
her family that her only legitimate act of independent
will is her last will and testament.
The
dairy
contention within
house
the
thus
it
follows,
the
center
of
family, allowing paper wills
dictate emotional wills.
and,
becomes
their
The Harlowe
language
in
to
family' s unity,
dealing
with
one
another alter after the reading of Grandfather Harlowe's
will.
In this moment,
the Harlowe men perceive Clarissa
as a powerful and dangerous adversary.
. . .
She tells Anna,
'
I, who never designed to take advantage of the
independency bequeathed to me, am t o b e a s dependent upon
my papa's
will
a s a d a u g h t e r ought
what i s good f o r h e r s e l f .
t o b e who knows n o t
This is the language of the
family now" (L13 80).
Implicit in her inheritance is Clarissa's ability to
make her own marriage without the advice of her father,
brother
or
patriarchal
Spring
uncles,
a
structure
reminds
us
dangerous
of
that
concept
for
eighteenth-century
the
development
the
families.
of
strict
settlement in the eighteenth century culminated with a
legal history determined to limit narrowly the ability of
women to inherit property (Law, Land and Family 144-147) .
The
privileged
position
of male
patriarchal
discourse
that would dominate decisions regarding Clarissa's future
is
confused,
frustrated,
and
ultimately
muffled
by
Clarissa's new ability to dominate her future through her
empowered
Grandfather
position
Harlowefs
as
an
civil
independent
will
gives
heiress.
power
to
Clarissa's indomitable and irregular individual will.
The danger for Clarissa as independent mistress is
intrinsic as we11 as extrinsic.
Her newfound
freedom
makes her vulnerable to the advice and urgings of Robert
Lovelace, since her financial power disrupts the family
power
structure,
silencing
her
parents,
angering
her
brother
and
uncles,
and
keeping
advisers who could set her free.
her
from those
very
As Donnalee Frega so
aptly puts it:
.
we
"character"
realize
that
it
is
Clarissa's
[that] has led her entire family
and Clarissa herself, to expect the compliance
they suggest.
their
They are honestly puzzled when
kinswoman
first time.
Clarissa
as
rebels,
apparently
for
the
It is the tendency to confront
an
object,
a
body
that
can
be
manipulated in spite of free will, rather than
as a self-directed identity, which blinds the
family to their child's real distress and the
child herself to her own potential for selfrealization. (15)
Frega leads us to understand Clarissa's rationalizations
why she cannot keep the dairy house and why she cannot
oppose her family or Lovelace in court.
Willing the Harlowe Family
Clarissa's
ability
to
use
the
language
of
inheritance and her understanding of its implications for
her life also drive the Harlowe men, Lovelace, and even
Anna Howe to use inheritance practice and civil action in
order to gain control over her.
One must also understand
the power of Grandfather Harlowe's will over the plot of
the novel.
His determination to leave the dairy house to
Clarissa is as subversive to the family men as it is
divisive of the family.
will do to Clarissa,
Beyond what the terms of his
one must look at what the terms do
to the plot and to the other characters they touch.
Grandfather Harlowe knew the terms of his will would
cause a stir.
He admitted that his "dispositions" were
not "strictly conformable to the law," but he wished that
his family would not "impugn or contest" his desire to
leave Clarissa the dairy house
Harlowe's
estate
will
planning
exemplifies the
of
the
first
eighteenth-century merchants,
obsessed
with
land
and
(L4 54).
investment choices and
generation
nearly
title
Grandfather
all
of
wealthy
of whom were
acquisition.
With
the
marriage of an eldest son, an established landed family
transmitted to him known amounts of inherited property
through
strict
settlement.
The bourgeoisie, however,
were merchants who dealt with hard cash, personalty, so
the full amount of their projected fortunes could not
always be ascertained until the immediate demise of the
father or until the marriage of the eldest son.
Because
of this, a father often left most of his estate in his
personal will for adjudication after his death (Habbakuk
5).
Merchants
and
other
wealthy
individuals
often
included stocks and government bonds in their estates
when their personal capital was not completely invested
in land
(Chesterman 126).
Because Grandfather Harlowe
was vested mostly in realty, contemporary readers would
have realized that the Harlowe family was at least one
generation out of a strictly merchant-class family.
They
were ascending rapidly through the ranks of the landed
gentry.
The willing of land, such as the dairy house to
Clarissa, through common law, was liable to litigation
and problems often arose.
The right of dower and barring
(getting rid
in
of)
dower
particularly thorny issue.
favor
of
jointure
was
a
By the time Richardson wrote
Clarissa, most young female members of landed, wealthy
families
had
a
outright
to
the
jointure,
survivor
which
of
would
the
then
be
marriage
given
without
stipulation to the estate.
Prospective brides usually brought a portion or a
fortune to marriage.
Obviously, the bigger the portion,
the more sought after a young woman would be.
Clarissars
portion, her dairy house, would have made her a fine
prospect for bride-seeking men.
The dairy house becomes
a disturbing development for the men in her family when
they consider Clarissa's
marriage-ability.
For though
the dairy house would certainly make her more desirable,
it would also make her independent.
Mullins
both
encouraged
by
sought
Clarissa's
their
suits,
Mr Symmes and Mr
hand.
which
Her
came
brother,
before
her
inheritance of the dairy house, became more patient with
her even after her inheritance and what he considered her
unruly behavior, knowing there would be more men like
Symmes
and
Mullins,
offering suit.
of
the
same
caliber
and
higher,
He wants to pick a husband for his sister
from among those most profitable for his family and for
his own future aspirations (L4 51).
to approve or disapprove her match.
that power in his sister's
He wants the power
He does not want
hands, or in his father's.
Again, Clarissa confesses to Anna the power shift in her
family, consulting James, Jr., for everything:
'How will my son, how will my nephew, take this
or that measure?
What will he say to it?
us consult him about it,'
Let
are the references
always previous to every resolution taken by
his
Well
superiors, whose
may
he
expect
will
to
be
ought
to
treated
be
his.
with
his
deference by every other person, when my papa
himself, generally so absolute, constantly pays
it to h i m .
. . .
(L5 54)
James, Jr., proposes that Clarissa and Arabella get
hefty portions
(allotments of money offered instead of
dower by the family of the prospective bride).
Clarissa,
additionally, is offered a large jointure as a temptation
to marry
Solmes.
Clarissa writes,
settlements"
(L8 61)!
The
jointures
that
involved
was
property not
they
"Such
beauty
of
money
terms, such
portions
as
and
well
in tail; thus, representative males
as
from
both families could negotiate and agree on amounts rather
than have the future husband's family be at the mercy of
a bride's family to proffer an unknown amount of money or
an
extraordinary
parcel
of
land
for
dower.
Solmes
sweetens the deal by making a jointure of his estate,
allowing Clarissa to inherit most of his property at his
death, should he die first.
Ironically, had she married
Solmes and then become a widow inheriting his property,
she would have inherited much more than a dairy house.
Her family saw no problem with her inheriting land in
that way; she was just not allowed to inherit land away
from James, or while she was still young and unmarried.
Clarissa's
grandfather recounts the wealth of the
Harlowe men in the Preamble of his will.
In fact, much
of the Harlowe wealth, it seems, comes from Clarissa's
mother,
Mrs.
Barchas,
Charlotte
Charlotte
Harlowe.
Harlowe's
from the Harlowe men.
According
class
to
Janine
differentiates
her
While their ambitions aim toward
the aristocratic, Mrs. Harlowe stands above them; she is
aristocratic (28).
She is the daughter of a viscount;
yet, she will be condemned by Anna Howe for having "long
behaved unworthy of her birth and fine qualities
133) .
(L27
Marrying James Harlowe, Sr., Charlotte Harlowe
loses her estates, her name, her power and her voice.
At
the
by
same
time,
she
remains
unacknowledged,
even
Grandfather Harlowe, for her contribution to "raising the
family."
As more inherited property, more
settlements were
made at the marriage of an eldest son, as was done in the
strict settlement of James Harlowe, Sr., resettling the
Harlowe estate in favor of his son and namesake.
this, Richardson followed the historical model
landed
gentry
as
well
as
the
the
development
seventeenth
and
of
In
of the
strict
settlement
throughout
eighteenth
centuries.
His history of the rise of the Harlowe family
fits with legal developments outlined by Eileen Spring
(Law, Land and Family 123-147).
By the time Clarissa Harlowe's
history is written,
strict settlement had become such an important watchword
for her family that the terms of her grandfather's
old-
fashioned will cause profound changes in their ability to
communicate with each other.
by mentioning
the
your
(L1 39).
family"
Anna Howe opens the novel
"disturbances
that have happened
Clarissa
acknowledges
in
these
disruptions, telling Anna, "Our family has indeed been
strangely discomposed
. . .
[It] has been in tumults,
ever since the unhappy transaction" (L2 41).
So pervasive are the disruptive powers of settlement
language that the family power structure suffers almost
immediately.
Clarissa's
father, a man immersed in the
language and mechanics of inheritance, signals the first
shift, telling his
arrives
before
Lovelace's
family he will wait until his
giving
his
opinion
desire to court Clarissa.
regarding
son
Robert
He is "desirous to
prevent all occasions of disunion and animosity in [my]
family"
(L3 45).
In
reality,
the
reader
finds
Mr.
Harlowe will no longer make a family decision without
first consulting his son.
Soon, his son makes all family
decisions, decisions which ultimately lead to the demise
of the Harlowe family and estate.
Eaves
and Kimpel point
out
that
even a
"selfish
brother" and an "envious sister" would not have been able
to accomplish anything had Mr. Harlowe been in control of
his family and defended Clarissa.
Mr. Harlowe is the
only character in the novel "entirely inadequate for the
role he has to play, and the fact that he is present
largely in name only leaves a serious gap in the first
two volumes" (Eaves and Kimpel 250-251).
We must
character
judge Mr.
whose
Harlowe,
authority
is
however, as a
compromised
silent
by
disruptive nature of settlements made on estates.
the
He is
tenant for life until James, Jr., marries and resettles
the
Harlowe
estate,
at
which
time,
James,
Jr.,
will
bequeath the Harlowe estate to his future eldest son, and
like his
father, will become
tenant for life.
Until
James, Jr.'s, own son comes of age and marries, allowing
the estate to come up for resettlement, James, Jr., not
his
father,
estates.
has
control
of
the
burgeoning
The estate was resettled and put
Harlowe
under his
control at his majority and will again be resettled at
his marriage, as we know from the epilogue.
The family,
however, should not be under the control of the younger
Harlowe.
Mr. Harlowe, Sr., should be in charge of his
family, but Richardson's point would have been well taken
by his contemporaries:
The power of land and money goes
well beyond its natural reach and even the eldest male
Harlowe is powerless to stop it.
Strict
settlement
helped
to
perpetuate
landed
estates by placing an entire estate in the hands of an
eldest son.
When he came to marriage or majority, the
eldest son became "owner" of the property.
an eldest son became "tenant
The father of
for life," below his
in
authority to manage the estate, but not limited in his
portion of rents.
estate
on
the
He and his son would then resettle the
as-yet-unborn
son
of
future marriage, of the eldest son.
the marriage,
or
As the next "tenant
for life," the son would only be limited in his power by
not
being
allowed
to
sell
any
or
all
lands
in
his
possession that are associated with the estate (Sugarman
37).
Because James, Jr., had reached majority before
marriage, the estate was resettled on him, and he
is
effectively in charge of Harlowe Place when the novel
begins.
Richardson
highlights
a
major
sticking
point
of
strict settlement, pointedly remarking on more than one
occasion about the elder Harlowe deferring to the opinion
of the young Harlowe in matters concerning family as well
as estates.
Clarissa tells Anna Howe that her father
will "determine nothing without his son"
(L3 46).
She
later tells Anna that James has had a terrible temper
since childhood and her parents deferred to him at an
early age, as he was "an only son who was to build up the
name and augment the honour of it" (L13 80).
is eerily
His youth
similar to that of Lovelacefs, as are
abilities as an estate manager.
his
James, Jr., and Lovelace
are excellent estate managers, accruing a great deal of
independent power through their skills and shady social
practices.
James Harlowe,
disruptive energy
power
on
making.
family
Angus
of
Jr.,
inheritance as
relationships
Ross
is a product
states
and
that
it
of
the
exercises
its
personal
Jamesfs
decision-
amassing
of
property for the Harlowe estate is what has driven James,
Sr., unnaturally to
resign his power
as
head
of the
family to the rash and thrusting heir ("Introduction" 2 0 21). This is in part true, but his inheritance through
strict
settlement
also
serves
to
endow
the
younger
Harlowe with many of the patriarchal rights of a father,
and so James, Jr.'s actions are not quite as unnatural as
Ross would like to assume.
He is head of the estate and
empowered as such to make all decisions regarding the
running of the manor and the lands.
The unnaturalness of the Harlowe family situation is
not James, Jr.'s
possession and control of the family
estate, but his financial need to control his sister, who
should still be under the jurisdiction of his father.
Richardson deliberately makes young Harlowe a fanatical
tyrant.
He writes Aaron Hill that he is not sure he made
the family's
treatment of Clarissa or the antagonistic
nature of her brother and sister's
rest of
the
family's
instigation of the
resentment toward her
apparent enough for his readers
clear and
(Selected Letters 74).
Richardson did make apparent, however, the possibility of
shifts in power when resettlement of an estate occurs.
James,
Jr.,
becomes
what
Lawrence
"influential kin," one of the " 'friends'
Stone
. . .
assumed the right of the control or veto
calls
who often
[in marriage]
and were in a position to enforce their will by granting
or withholding favors, be it money, house, property or
good will
. . .
"
(15).
Desire for property and rank
consumes James, Jr., as it does his father and uncles.
Clarissa writes Anna, "I have more than once mentioned to
you the darling view some of us have long had of raising
a family
. . .
A view
. . .
entertained by families which
having great substance, cannot be satisfied without rank
and title" (L13 77).
Solmes
is
James's
perfect
choice
for
Clarissa's
husband because his land adjoins Harlowe Place.
James,
Jr., and the rest of the family are exuberant at the
thought.
James abides by and believes in the language of
strict settlement, saying that all realty should pass to
the eldest son and portions of the remaining personalty
should go to the other siblings.
According to Clarissa,
James, as the eldest son, feels he should inherit all the
realty, grandfathers', father's, unclesr, and all others'
that should fall to him, such as his godmother's estate.
He also manipulates family sentiment in order to inherit
the
remainder
of
the
portioned
personal
with
or
after
two
are
apiece.
He is sure all of the land and personalty left
portions
fifteen
the
sisters
after settling his sisters'
ten
estate
thousand
and his motherrs
jointure will be enough to entitle him to a peerage (L13
77).
David Sugarman underscores the validity of James,
Jr.'s
thinking, arguing that strict settlement, adopted
in earnest after the Civil War,
developed as a legal
device to preserve and develop great landed estates and
helped to accentuate the centrality of property and the
politics of propertied power well
(37-38).
century
Rita
into the nineteenth
Goldberg
notes
that
those
eighteenth-century families owning the most property were
often the most politically powerful.
It is Goldberg's
view that many of these families aspired to that kind of
power
Richardson provides
(53).
the
Harlowes
as
an
example of one of those families.
L o v e l a c e and His L e g a c y
Richardson
complicates
further
convoluted plot with Robert Lovelace.
his
already
A master of legal
language, more so him than the Harlowe men, Lovelace is a
consummate inheritor.
Unlike the Harlowe men who depend
on a woman's inheritance and title to found their family,
Lovelace depends on his wealth coming directly from minor
aristocracy.
His description is couched in terms of
inheritance.
He was, "unused it seems from childhood to
check
or
control-a
case
too
common
in
considerable
families," who "received from everyone those civilities
which were due to his birth" (L3 46).
described as a "generous landlord"
Later still, he is
choosing to "limit
himself to an annual sum," declining even equipage and
carriage in order to keep himself out of debt to his
aunts and uncles, and having an estate "never mortgaged,"
living with excellent credit, and 'he
was near upon, if
not quite, clear of the world" (L4 50) .
Lovelace exemplifies the young aristocrat disturbed
by the intrusion of the merchant gentry into his realm of
power
and
money.
work
authority
through the
sheer
force of their
He also exemplifies the destructive forces at
in
primogeniture
and
strict
settlement.
When
painting Lovelace so deliberately, Richardson had access
to many
of those in such positions.
George Brodrick
points out one darker aspect of this type of inheritance,
observing
that
an
unfriendly
critic
once
spoke
of
primogeniture as a tendency to "establish in the center
of each family a magnificently fed and coloured drone,
the incarnation of wealth and social dignity, the visible
end of human endeavour, a sort of great Final Cause"
(qtd. in Brodrick 113).
"great Final Cause."
Lovelace fits the bill as a
Lovelace is the last of his line,
desperate to succeed to his uncle's
title in order to
keep up the tradition and heritage of his family.
If he
does not marry well, there is a good chance that the
Lovelace
family
name
and
husbands of his half-sisters.
estates
will
pass
to
the
Lovelace is proud, and Richardson refers repeatedly
to his yearning for superiority
(Eaves and Kimpel 267).
Title and inheritance, not money, were the watchwords for
his type of aristocracy.
Many of Lovelace's
class were
land poor and alarmed that the rising merchant gentry
could not only eat up their estates, but also could sully
the
purity
of
their
noble
aristocratic families.
lines
by
marrying
into
Lovelace is unique to his class
in that he watches his pennies, keeping himself out of
debt.
However,
he typically envies the unlimited supply
of merchant money while cinching in his own belt.
For all his possessions, Lovelace was in much the
same position as James Harlowe, Jr.
Both actively sought
titles they believed they deserved.
inherit his
uncle's;
father's
Lord M.
title, nor
Lovelace did not
could he
could not bestow
inherit his
it on him, either.
Lovelace would have to earn it through land and money,
and, most likely, marriage.
regarding
eighteenth
land
and money
century
than
present (Habbakuk 41).
mostly
from
the
The rules for inheritance
were
in
very
any
Commons
landed
often
other
time,
in
the
past
or
The House of Commons was made up
gentry,
businessmen, and professionals.
the
different
held
titles,
prosperous
merchants,
Though the members of
they
were
inferior
socially to the aristocracy.
Some had been titled by the
monarchy in exchange for a vote on a specific bill the
monarchy
needed to be passed.
Economically, however,
the members of the House of Commons were more powerful
than the House of Lords.
About one-fifth of the House of
Commons was related to peerage or was bound closely to it
through ties of marriage (Speck 16).
Lord
M.
was
not
gentrified
nobility,
nineteenth
century,
excluded
would
from
confer
hereditary
and
landed
inherited
his
by
gentry
titles
title,
the
upon
nobility;
he
was
beginning
of
the
finally
completely.
his
death,
had
been
The
Crown
once
more.
Lovelace had to inherit his uncle's estate and his halfsistersf estates and marry well in order to be considered
for Lord M.'s
male
title.
The Crown need not confer it to a
relation, which made
desperate
to
receive
it.
Lovelace even more urgently
Clarissa
relates her uncle
Antony's conversation with Lord M. to Anna:
Lord M. told him what great things he and his
two half-sisters
intended to do
for him,
in
order to qualify him for the title (which would
be extinct at his Lordship's
they
hoped
to
procure
for
death) and which
him,
or
a
still
higher, that of those ladiesf father, which had
been for some time extinct on failure of heirs
male;
that this view made his relations so
earnest for his marrying
. . .
[.
1 (L13 79)
The more land he acquired before the death of his uncle
the better his chances for having either of the titles
conferred.
The right wife would make his life and his
quest much easier.
As a young man, Lovelace suffered the effects of
courtship for a title.
He relates to Belford that he
"could not bear that a woman, who was the first that had
bound me in silken fetters
to me
. . ."
(L31 144) .
. . .
should prefer a coronet
He vowed revenge on all women.
Young Lovelace was turned down for a title.
nothing;
title
everything.
Lovelace's
Love meant
quest
for
his
title began in his youth, spurred by the heartache of
unrequited love.
The language of title, or inheritance,
of marriage and settlements was so pervasive in his youth
that it tainted for life his view of virtue and womanhood
and dramatically illustrates the affective power it held
in the eighteenth century.
Lovelace was not scorned for
another; he was scorned for a title.
When Robert Lovelace is introduced to the Harlowe
family, the language Richardson uses has a distinctive
legal tone.
Clarissafs uncle tells
us
of Lovelacefs
"paternal
estate,"
and
relates
that
Lovelace
"was
immediate heir to very splendid fortunes," and if his
inheritance were coupled with what Clarissa could bring
to their marriage, Lovelace would be conferred Lord M.'s
title or higher and "Clarissa might one day be a peeress
of Great Britain" (L13 79).
Lovelace
telling him
voices
that
the
same
he had made
sentiments
to
inroads with
Belford,
Clarissa's
uncle, who will be his ambassador to "Queen Annabella
Harlowe,
to
engage
princessly daughter
her
. . ."
(for
example
(L31 145) .
sake)
to
her
He readily takes
up the language of inheritance and rises to the occasion
of winning over Clarissa as a
kind of estate auction
competition between Solmes, son James, and himself: "But
was ever hero in romance
trials!
called upon to harder
Fortune and family and reversionary grandeur on
my side!
146) .
. . .
Such a wretched fellow my competitor!"
(L31
Indeed, James, Jr., tells Clarissa that Lovelace
"says you are his, and shall be his, and he will be the
death of any man who robs him of his PROPERTY"
(L52.1
223).
Lovelace's underlying motivation for revenge on the
fair sex is revealed in legal terms when he speaks of
Clarissa: "Until by matrimonial
or equal intimacies
I
have found her less than an angel, it is impossible to
think of any other"
couched
(L31 147).
euphemistically
lawyers
and
in
His sexual objective is
the
businessmen:
high-flown
language
"Matrimonial
or
of
equal
intimaciesr' smacks of the cold, calculating language of a
contract.
Lovelace's goal at the beginning of the novel is to
marry well in order to retain his family title.
he
concentrates
on
marriage
settlement
and
Because
the
legal
issues of marriage to the right woman, he is able to
override the bad feelings he generates in the Harlowe
family.
There
is
uproar
at
Harlowe
Place
when
he
arrives, which Aunt Hervey overlooks because he is such a
good estate manager and he is so rich, so handsome and so
charming
(L4, 48, 50).
Because his wealth and station
whitewash his less than stellar reputation, Lovelace is
able
to
ingratiate
himself
including Harlowe Place.
everywhere
and
anywhere,
He sets his sights on Clarissa,
and had James not intervened when he did, Clarissa might
well have become Lady Lovelace with the full blessing of
her
family.
Even
formidable powers:
Clarissa
understands
Lovelace's
"Mr. Lovelace is not a man to be
easily brought to give up his purposerr (L4 51).
Clarissa knows well that Lovelace has outdone her
brother, both socially and legally.
Lovelace's family is
already titled and known among the peerage, and Lovelace
won the duel with her brother.
legal right
Lovelace now has the
to extract apology or other payment
from
James for the inconvenience that the duel has caused him.
The
duel
settled
the
superficial
charges
James,
Jr.,
accused him of, but the loser still has to pay a debt.
Clarissa will be part of the debt Lovelace wants James to
pay.
He tells Belford: "
. . .
I am playing him off as I
please; cooling, or inflaming, his violent passions, as
may best suit my purposes
. . ."
(L31 144).
Lovelace
uses legal language, including settlement and inheritance
language, better
family.
imagine.
than any male member
of the Harlowe
He is quicker and shrewder than James, Jr., can
In
the
opening
letters
retelling
the
duel
between the two, it is obvious that Lovelace is the easy
winner.
The irony of Clarissa's
sturdy individual will is
that it leads to her impending social ruin, the loss of
her innocence, and her death before she can share her
virtue and talents with the world
(Suarez 79).
James
uses the power of his inheritance to silence his father
and mother and to attempt to subdue Clarissa.
He does
not yet use physical force,
ability
t o manipulate
wealth.
his
family
through
his
words
and
L o v e l a c e w i l l e a s i l y a p p l y t h e l a n g u a g e h e knows
w e l l t o e a c h member o f
James,
turn,
knowing h i s power l i e s i n h i s
Sr.,
are
t h e Harlowe f a m i l y .
vulnerable
James,
Jr.,
to
his
and
words,
but
two
uncles.
the
so
also,
Lovelace's
language,
not
his
physical
in
Clarissa
i s l e d through t h e garden g a t e by t h e
herself
only is
Not
force of
strength.
The
j u m b l e o f w o r d s o p p o s i n g a n d s u b v e r t i n g t h e m s e l v e s makes
i t d i f f i c u l t t o d i s c e r n who o r w h a t i s t h e r e a l c a u s e o f
Clarissa's
death.
One c a n p o i n t
t o Lovelace
or
James,
o r e v e n t o G r a n d f a t h e r Harlowe a n d h i s w i l l .
Jr.,
could even point
will.
t o Clarissa's
own o b s t i n a t e
W h a t e v e r t h e t r u e c o m b i n a t i o n may b e ,
One
individual
inheritance
l a n g u a g e a n d p r a c t i c e s weigh h e a v i l y i n t h e e n d .
The Howe and Harlowe Women
While
the
Harlowe
influence over Clarissa,
of
the
Howe
settlement
Harlowe,
century
household
practice
men
As
a
playing
their
C l a r i s s a ' s mother,
mother.
Lovelace
t h e women o f
are
in
and
new
for
Harlowe P l a c e a n d
out
own
jockey
the
ways.
effects
of
Charlotte
seems t h e i d e a l e i g h t e e n t h wife,
she
was
the
"worthy
daughter of both sides of very honourable families," who
brought a "very large portion" to her marriage, and who,
with the unexpected death of several of her relations,
brought
her
husband
even
more
riches
(L4 53).
Her
marriage into the Harlowe family presents the "specific
social
and
alliance
economic
and
calculations"
enhanced
the
that
economic
solidified
position
Harlowe family (Boxer and Quartaert 36).
an
of
the
In other words,
Mrs. Harlowe was instrumental, if not fundamental, in the
first attempts of the Harlowe family to "raise" itself.
Lovelace
Place-for,
tells
like
Belford,
Versailles,
"Everybody
it
is
knows
sprung
up
Harlowe
from
a
dunghill within every elderly personfs remembrance" (L34
161).
The infancy of Harlowe Place, one can speculate,
is at least a partial result of the portion Charlotte
Harlowe brought to her marriage.
mother
brought more
complaining
that
Clarissa tells us her
than just money
should
her
mother
to her marriage,
but
"exert
that
authority which the superiority of her fine talents gives
her," things might then be calmer at Harlowe Place
54) .
(L5
Nevertheless, Mrs. Harlowe' s talents are secondary
to family, as well as patriarchal, will.
Vivien Jones illuminates the precarious nature of
female
authority
in
an
eighteenth-century
family
by
relating
the
relatively
story
of
well-known
the
member
Richardson's lifetime.
Marchioness
of
the
Lambert,
peerage
a
during
She writes to her daughters after
her particularly messy divorce, telling them, "One should
keep up authority in one's
mild
authority"
Indeed,
Mrs.
authority"
family, but it should be a
(Young
Ladies
Pocket
Harlowe
learns
the
early
in
her
lesson
of
Anna
Howe
marriage.
Clarissa, "What must have been
184) .
Library
"mild
asks
[your mamafs] treatment,
to be thus subjugated, as I may call it"
(L27 132)?
She
goes on, relating Annabella Harlowe's history:
Little did the good Viscount
think, when he
married his darling, his only, daughter to so
well-appearing
a
gentleman,
and
to
her
own
liking, too, that she would have been so much
kept down.
Another would call your father a
tyrant, if you will not; all the world indeed
would; and if you love your mother, you should
not be very angry at the world for taking that
liberty.
(L27 132,133)
Clarissa confesses to Anna that had her mother been of "a
temper that would have borne less, she would have had ten
times less to bear than she had" (L5 54).
Clarissa
also
know
that
had
her
mother
Paradoxically,
kept
up
her
"authority," Clarissa herself may not have had to suffer
as she does at the hands of her father and brother.
She
tells Anna that her mother "never thought to oppose" her
husband, and though he and the rest of the family value
her, "she has purchased that value by her compliances"
Money,
(L13 82).
power
for men,
marriage
or
either married
while money
through
or
inherited, means
for women,
portions,
means
either
through
compliance
and
subjugation to a "mild authority."
Mrs.
Harlowe's
realm as a mother
is to keep the
house running smoothly, raise and educate her children.
Inheritance language choked the Harlowe household into
silence, and Mrs. Harlowe was among the first to feel its
disruptive power.
Richardson hints at the decline in her
"domestic authority" in a letter to Aaron Hill:
Such a character as the Mother's,
I have known:
an excellent woman, kept down by the violent
and overbearing temper of a Husband; and even
of a son joining with his Father; and neither
of them having half her own Sense, and no good
qualities at all.
By Lovelace's
sending his
unopen'd Letter to her, as you put it, and her
privately giving it to her daughter, I saw a
necessity
to alter
what I had drawn it
her
whole
. . .
Character
from
.(Correspondence 79)
Mrs. Harlowe is Clarissa's model.
She is what good
women become when they obey their patriarchal masters,
suffering under an obedience often not coming easily or
unencumbered.
Highlighting
her
uneasiness, Richardson
casts Mrs. Harlowe as ill during the beginning of the
family upheaval.
Charlotte Harlowe is often in tears as
she tries to persuade her daughter to comply with family
wishes that she marry Solmes.
Clarissa relates that her
mother opposes sending Clarissa to Scotland to care for
her
brother's
newly-acquired
estate,
"because,
having
relieved [Mrs. Harlowe], as she is pleased to say, of the
household cares
(for which my sister, you know, has no
turn) they must again devolve upon her if I go" (L6 56).
Mrs.
Harlowe
marriage
resolve.
into
is
a
the
woman
Harlowe
of
exceptional
family
has
Clarissa sums up her mother's
birth
tempered
whose
her
place in the
family in a postscript to Anna, saying, "Sir Oliver's
observation, who
knew the world perfectly well,
[was]
that fear was a better security than love for a woman's
good behaviour to her husband" (L41 187).
Further,
Dr. Gregory and other conduct writers are
adamant that a woman must always retain herself as keeper
of her house, for it is her duty.
honor.
Clarissa's
It is a matter of
mother has obviously come to
some
crucial turning point, giving Clarissa the keys to her
house, and,
household.
in effect, giving up
her
power
over
the
Clarissa relates to Anna:
The
contentions
masculine
of
spirits,
these
and
fierce,
the
these
apprehension
of
mischiefs that may arise from the increasing
animosity
which
all
here
have
against
Mr.
Lovelace, and his too-well known resentful and
intrepid character, she cannot bear.
Then the
foundation laid, as she dreads, for jealousy
and heartburning
happy
and
so
in her own family, late so
united,
afflict
exceedingly
a
gentle and sensible mind, which has from the
beginning on all occasions sacrificed its own
inward satisfaction to outward peace. (L5 54)
The last section of the paragraph is most revealing, for
Clarissa
urgently
"authority."
wants
her
Unfortunately,
mother
James,
to
Sr. s,
exert
gout,
her
the
family ambitions, and the constant feuding of James and
Arabella
have
worn
down
Mrs.
Harlowe.
By
the
time
Clarissa writes her next letter to Anna, the protection
and guidance of her mother's
"authority" is gone: "Could
you believe
it?-And
they
mamma with the rest!"
While
Mrs.
are all determined
too; my
(L7 58).
Harlowe
sinks deeper
and
deeper
into
silence, Mrs. Howe continues to be well able to speak, in
part due to the absence of a dominant male voice in her
household.
Although her marriage had been the product of
the same system that married Mrs. Harlowe, Mrs. Howe's
husband
died
young.
She,
like
Charlotte
Harlowe,
suffered from the ill temper of her husband, for Anna
tells Clarissa that Mrs. Howe "was very sensible
. . .
of
the violence of my poor Papa's temper, that she can so
long remember that, when acts of tenderness and affection
seem quite forgotten" (L132 475).
Anna speculates that
her mother exerts a heavy hand with her because she was
under the same heavy hand when her husband was living
(L132
Mrs.
475).
Howe
experienced
the
trials
of
marriage, as did Charlotte Harlowe; but, while Charlotte
must endure them still, Mrs. Howe experiences independent
success
after
the
death
of
her
husband,
becoming
a
"notable wife," one who could put to use her considerable
talents
that
Mrs. Howe's
were
wasted
during marriage
(L132 475).
jointure was enough after the death of her
husband to allow her to continue to live in her home and
to
remain unfettered by
another will
or
the will
of
another husband.
Mrs.
Howe
retains
control
of
her
daughter's
correspondence, and she is more than happy to advise and
consent on Clarissa's behavior, as well.
Correspondence,
both written and spoken, is a lively, ongoing event in
her house.
"My momma charged me, at last, to write that
side over again," relates Anna in a letter to Clarissa,
reporting in detail the running side commentary that goes
along with the mother/daughter exchanges (L27 131).
What
a stark difference from the hushed silence of the Harlowe
household, which is shattered only with the ranting of
James, Jr., and Arabella!
When
Anna
Hickman, a man
patriarchal
Howe
marries
the
outrageously
seemingly devoid of
tendencies
of
the
patient
the petulance and
original
Mr.
Howe,
Lovelace, and the overbearing Harlowe men, Anna does not
give up her independence.
that Clarissa's
Belford relates to Lovelace
Poor Fund will remain intact thanks to
Anna, since she oversees it while Clarissa is alive and
since then she has made Hickman agree not to ask for any
changes in her habits when
1492).
they married
("Conclusion"
The
comic
through the
certainly
relief
Richardson
relationship of Anna
amused
the
brings
Howe
contemporary
to
and
Clarissa
her mother
reading
public.
However, the subtle irony of their situation serves to
enhance
the
deplorable
situation
in
which
Clarissa's
parents have placed her, and in which they themselves
live.
While Anna has no father, Clarissa's
given
over
Clarissa
his
also,
power
in a
and
voice
to
his
sense, without
a
father has
son,
leaving
father.
While
Anna's mother is constantly butting in, giving advice and
arguing,
Clarissa's
mother
is
mute,
family "will" to achieve greatness.
Bradshaigh,
who,
Richardson
faced with
hopes
trials and
silenced
by
the
In a letter to Lady
there were
many
hardships, would
mothers,
still do
right by their families, citing that Clarissa, by doing
the duties expected of her as a daughter, brought to
light what a parent's
duty ought to be
(Correspondence
92-93).
Clarissa as Inheritor
Rita Goldberg
beginning
of
her
"marriage
cases
sums up Clarissa's
story
lineage
succinctly,
and
wealth
position at the
relating
are
that
in
guaranteed
by
divine commandment" (100).
The Harlowe family commands
Clarissa to give up the dairy house as well as her dream
of remaining single to marry Solmes, thereby making all
the Harlowe males happy.
stepping-stone
to
Land is everything to them, the
family
greatness.
Marriage
is
an
economic transaction for the betterment of the family,
not the individual.
has
not
Unfortunately for Clarissa, marriage
yet become
a
social
institution of
love
and
independent choice.
The inheritance language that paralyzes and confuses
the rest of Clarissa's
Jr.,
becomes
extreme
Solmes
demand
or
family, in the hands of James,
disruptive
from him
else.
enough
through
Clarissa
against their wishes.
to
is
translate
her
forced
into
parents:
to
take
an
Marry
action
Richardson aptly provides Clarissa
with a force of will at a time when general thinking
concluded that the wisdom and guidance of parents would
never command a child to do anything harmful
child (Goldberg 101).
for the
In exchange, children were to be
obedient to their parents since they were always looking
out for the welfare of their children; the divine right
of
the
family was
to protect
interests and to accrue wealth.
the
family lineage
and
Clarissa Harlowe found that the Bible that ordains
parental control over children also ordains forgiveness
of her tormentors and provides her with a language that
overrides the legal and familial language that hounds her
for the last year of her life.
Clarissa wills away her
secular trappings and inherits the Kingdom of God.
Not
suited to the bonds of earthly marriage, she becomes a
bride
of
Christ.
The mundane
passing
on
of
earthly
wealth and name cannot touch her one true language, a
language that allows her to find her Father in Heaven,
the true father who carries on a dialogue with her, an
inner narrative, and who teaches her the true meaning of
obedience and faith, allowing her to inherit the Kingdom
of Heaven.
The language of inheritance, however, does not end
with the demise of Clarissa Harlowe.
Its power rages on
to the conclusion of the novel, involving itself directly
with the fates of all the other characters.
Lovelace's
family grieves his death because he was the last male of
the line.
1489)
.
With his death, the family dies ("Conclusion"
James, Jr., defies his father and mother once
again and marries into endless court battles trying to
realize a tenuous claim on his wife's
yet-unsettled estate.
portion of an as-
His life is consumed and ruined by
inheritance
Arabella,
language
and
also, marries
marries
her
for her
falling
out
with
practice
for a
title, and
fortune.
her
("Conclusion
her
Her marriage
brother,
and
she
finds
1489).
husband
causes
a
herself
unhappily alone with a husband who leads a "free" life.
Her
title, portion,
happiness
Arabella's
and
all, are
comfort
in
useless in bringing
marriage
her
(Conclusion 1490).
unhappiness and inability to remove herself
from her situation show the reader what very well may
have happened to her mother.
Solmes remains Solmes, a
man in continuous wonder that no woman will have him no
matter
how
vast
his
wealth
to
estates,
and
estates
("Conclusion"
1490) .
References
titles,
portions
and
settlements are so pervasive, even through the conclusion
of the novel, that one cannot possibly mistake the power
of inheritance language as it plays itself out in the
pages of Clarissa.
Clarissa Harlowe is the unfortunate
heiress of more than just a dairy house.
She is the
embodiment of a legally bound woman, specially selected
to enhance a family estate.
She is a woman of beauty,
grace and charm, hunted down in order to expand by one
the patriarchal lineage of England.
Conclusion
A
confluence
of
settlement
events
disrupts
the
Harlowe family, a family that Clarissa describes as happy
before
the
opening
of
her
grandfather's
will.
The
controversy hardens the will of James, Jr., to make his
sister conform to the patrilineal and patriarchal power
of
the
family.
communication
Inheritance
of
the
Harlowe
language
family.
disrupts
the
Clarissa' s
temperament, her penchant for charity and her love of the
simple
life
are
all
settlement practice
The
overriding
in
direct
conflict
and patriarchal
male/political
with
strict
inheritance power.
discourse
that
would
normally determine the direction of her life has been
undermined not only by her wish to live a simple life
alone, forsaking the value of her body, but also by the
power given to her through her grandfather's legacy.
If Clarissa wants to live in the dairy house, she
must not only defy her father, but she must also resist
all social pressure to conform to family wishes.
Her
grandfather' s "unconformable will" grants her a legacy,
but public thinking decrees she should have no inherited
right
to
the
"unconformity"
house.
are
Her
pressing
grandfather' s
against
her.
and
her
Yet,
own
J.P.
Cooper suggests that not all of a landowner's property
was subject to strict settlement, and the tradition of
dealing
freely
survived
in
with
the
one's
own
eighteenth
acquisitions
century
and
(228).
land
That
the
Harlowe family rejects entirely the idea of leaving any
piece of property out of the hands of James, Jr., is
testament to the over-zealous greed for land and title
Richardson saw so clearly in society around him.
The
force of public
overpowers
the
grandfather
to
opinion
traditional
do
as
he
regarding
prerogative
pleases
with
of
settlement
Clarissa's
his
property.
Clarissa inherits more than just realty from him.
She
receives his penchant for individuality and independent
will.
What is more, because written wills were private
documents,
surprise
her
to
inheritance
everyone,
is
a
including
private
her
act,
family.
and
a
Strict
settlement was a public act, with everyone knowing the
order of inheritance and the land and characters involved
(Spring Law, Land and Family 146).
This same private act
visits public humiliation, not only on Clarissa, but also
on the family.
One of Anna Howe's first concerns is that
Clarissa and her family are hurt by becoming the "subject
of public talk," for it is "impossible but that whatever
relates to a young lady, whose distinguished merits have
made
her
the
public
care,
should
engage
everyone's
attention" (L1 39).
Clarissafs
imperative
family.
she
inheritance
may
feel
restricts
toward
the
any
filial
"raising"
of
her
One cannot discount her power even after she
gives managerial dispensation for the dairy house to her
father.
Her brother's
intuitive knowledge of her power
contributes to his usurpation of his father's
power over the family.
Letter 24 is an excellent example
of how James gains control.
In the letter, Clarissa
reproduces for Anna a letter from James.
your papa's
with,
"If
and mama's
anything
I
voice and
command
have
. . ."
written
harsh, it is still in your power
always be so) to remedy it
. . ."
It begins, "By
and ends ominously
appears
severe
or
(but perhaps will not
(L24.1 120-121)
.
James
attributes the restrictions spelled out for Clarissa in
this letter to his mother and father, but Clarissa is
quick
to
answer
James,
power (L 24.2 121)
recognizes
James's
.
acknowledging
Sr.,
orders,
his
Three letters later, Anna Howe also
authority:
"Your
what has he to do to control you"
Harlowe,
his
loses
his
insolent
brother,
(L27 129). When James
parental
voice
and
his
patriarchal authority to this son, Clarissa must make her
stand.
Not only has the man who should have the guidance
of her future been silenced, but so also has her true
inheritance, her merchant upbringing, with its drive and
creativity and puritan work ethic.
Miguel Suarez notes,
"The plot of Clarissa essentially consists of a single
iterated action: the heroine says 'nof to those who want
to persuade or compel her to assent" (69).
In many ways, the language of the family and the
language of the law insinuate themselves into each other
rather than against each other so that the meaning of
"will"
is continually disrupted and becomes, at best,
ambiguous.
Clarissa's inheritance of an independent will
allows her to leave as her legacy her ability to say
"no."
when
For Clarissa, the cultural dynamic that occurs
the
power
expectations and
of
inheritance
clashes
with
family
individual objects profoundly
affects
the subjective dynamic that, as Ian Parker states, "tears
at our sense of self as discourses use us" (xiii).
Driven out of her family into the arms of a rake who
installs
seclusion,
her
in
a
Clarissa
brothel,
comes
to
then
drives
realize
that
her
into
the
only
effective way to communicate with her family is through
their own language, in a will.
Writing her will is an
act she describes as "coolly deliberate" on her part, an
obligation that she for some time has undertaken, so that
had she been "taken off" suddenly, she would never have
been "absolutely destitute of a w i l l "
"will"
is italicized, showing a
(L507 1412).
Her
deliberateness on the
part of Richardson and his heroine to acknowledge the
multinomial nature of the world the blurred meanings that
occur when language and culture overlap.
Clarissa proves
throughout the novel that she is aware and capable of
using language to her advantage.
Mona Scheuermann points out that Clarissa's
legal
language
is
"remarkable"
and
that
use of
perhaps
Richardson just "lost sight of the age and status of his
heroine"
(73).
Clarissa' s legal language accounts for
her dealings with the "unconformity" of her grandfather's
will, as well as the influence of strict settlement and
wills on her brother and the rest of the family.
only language they want to understand is legal.
The
Clarissa
understands them, for she makes her father executor of
her will rather than her brother and/or sister, knowing
that should they survive James Harlowe, Sr., then all
will
devolve
to
them
by
"virtue
of
his
favour
and
indulgence, as the circumstances of things with regard to
marriage
settlements
1413-1414).
of
otherwise
may
require"
(L507
She knows also her Uncle John had been upset
that she was willed the family portraits by Grandfather
Harlowe.
Clarissa smoothes his resentment by willing the
pictures to him (L507 1414).
Scheuermann also observes that Clarissa' s wealth is
considerable, and as a single woman she has control of
her own property, adding up to a great deal indeed, but
still not giving her power or independence.
The stigma
is social: "Clarissa could enter litigation and be free,
but good girls die first" (77-78).
deliberately
or
not,
that
Richardson implies,
the
effect
of
the
"unconformable will" upon Clarissa and her family is a
disruption of her
life and
their
lives; however, the
disruption also enables Clarissa to use her knowledge of
inheritance language to perfect a "conformable will" at
the end of her life, something that her family is never
able to do.
Thus,
obstacle
Grandfather Harlowefs paper will becomes the
to
her
brother's
individual
endorsed will to obtain a title.
give
up
her
dairy
house,
and
socially
In pushing Clarissa to
James,
Jr.,
runs
against
Clarissafs individual will and her ability to say no.
As
Suarez so aptly observes, "Clarissafs 'Nof is an attempt
to assert her own autonomy, to secure her right to a will
of her own" (69).
Clarissars physical imprisonment in Harlowe Place,
at
Mrs.
Sinclairrs household, and
ultimately,
at
her
apartments with Mrs. Smith is a metaphor for the legal
prison she is confined to after her grandfather wills her
the dairy house.
Her will takes on layers of meaning,
from the dairy house will, to her individual will, to her
growing will to defy her brother, to her final will to
die and will away her earthly goods.
confounded, and
The meaning becomes
each meaning blends and
takes on the
identity of the others as Clarissa flees through the
garden gate toward her tragic end.
Chapter Three
The Language of Mentors and
Guardians in Burney's Evelina
Advising M s . Anville:
Introduction
Frances Burneyfs preface to Evelina announces her
intention "[to] draw characters from nature, though not
from life, and to mark the manners of the times
(7).
Her words echo Johnson's
realistic novel."
. . .
I/
definition of the "new
Johnsonfs definition and his praise of
Burneyfs first novel bring newly diverse perspectives to
a story often regarded as a novel of manners.
Evelina, however, is more than a novel of manners;
it is also an inheritance novel.
inheritance language and
Evelina depends on
settlement. Marriage practice
and inheritance settlements cluttered Burney's
as well as those of her family.
own life,
Inheritance language
figures prominently in the ability of Burney's characters
to function; and the heroine, Evelina Anville, is judged
throughout the novel by her ability to inherit.
Inheritance
language
and
settlement practice
work
differently, and in a more sinister way, in Evelina than
in Clarissa.
In Clarissa, the reader easily discerns the
"good guys" and the "bad guys."
Evelina.
The
controlling
inheritance-her
guardian,
and
The same is not true in
"mysterious
her
own
factors
of
birth, "
her
seeming
Evelina' s
reticent
arnbivalence-inask
the
motivations and actions of supposed "good guys," while
concealing the efforts of characters who seem perverse or
unconventional.
Characters
in novels
such as Evelina
cannot be gauged as good or bad by what they say. While
the characters in Clarissa use inheritance language with
proficiency, they disguise their motives and objectives.
The
characters
in
Evelina,
on
the
other
hand,
do
intentionally distort the terms of inheritance in order
to disguise their motives and mask their true characters.
While Richardson's experience with the legal side of
strict settlement is apparent in his charactersf use of
its
language,
Burney's
own
involvement
is
much
more
personal, thus manifesting itself more subtly within her
work .
Burneyfs
diaries
and
letters
are
full
of
situations and outcomes stemming from inheritance and its
effect on women.
Burney writes
about
the
effect
of
strict settlement more from personal revelation than from
a strictly legal point of view.
posits that Burney's
her
"association
Judith Lowder Newton
close association with the great,
with
courtly
fiction,"
and
her
"idealization of genteel women" allow her to accept the
"rule of landed men" and make genteel women's plight seem
more
(34).
"endurable"
elaborate
on
merchandise
Burney's
in
the
However,
display
marriage
Newton
of
genteel
market.
Her
does
women
not
as
consistent
portrayal of Evelina as an "un-moneyed" object of men of
the
merchant
foundational
as
to
well
any
as
of
desire
the
Burney
upper
may
classes
have
had
is
to
acquiesce to the merchant and upper class patriarchal
need to commodify women.
Burney's
desire is to prove
Evelina' s ultimate right to inherit, no matter what her
superficial circumstance.
The extrinsic quality upper
class eighteenth-century society looks for in women of
marriageable
position
may
be
"endurable,"
but
Burney
proves through Evelina that the individual quality of a
woman
is ultimately
the mark
by
which
society
should
judge her.
Burney's
reluctance to claim authorship of Evelina
is indicative of the dominance of patriarchal thinking in
the eighteenth century. Virtuous daughters did not claim
authorship,
a
form
of
authority,
in
a
male
realm.
Virtuous daughters submitted to male authority, giving
even their names and their identity over to the name and
the identity of their husbands.
Daughters submitted to
male
patrilineal
authority
another.
by
trading
one
Even by using her father's
name
for
surname, Frances
Burney would be treading over the line of authority had
she
published
Greenfield
without
her
illustrates
father's
Burney's
permission.
Susan
ambivalence
over
authorship through Burney' s hesitation to let her father,
Charles Burney,
know
that
she had
Greenfield tells us that Burney's
published
Evelina.
dedication suggests,
"that at the time of Evelinafs publication, namelessness
also had personal significanceff (304).
Burney, mother and guardian of her earlier youthful
creation, burned the History of Caroline Evelyn, spurred
by the disparaging remarks of her stepmother. According
to Margaret Anne
Doody, Burney
believed
the
idea
of
eighteenth-century society, including her father and the
second Mrs. Burney, that female writing was "shameful,"
something to be "overcome or subdued"; it was "wrong"
(Introduction viii) .
"overcome"
or
Her "shameful" scribbling was not
"subdued,"
however,
and
she
produced
Evelina
Anville,
Evelyn's.
as
Indeed, in
much
Burney's
father
that
as
Caroline
Frances Burney: The Life
Works, Doody states that '[Iln
her
child
in the
1814 Frances can remind
such shame was
absurd,
and
. . .
productions were ultimately validated
that
when
her
'the
mother of Evelina' and Evelina's mother-novel were placed
on a pyre
. . ."
(37). With the birth of Evelina, Burney
passed the legacy of the Evelyn family inheritance to Mr.
Villars
and
Mrs.
Selwyn,
narrative
guardians
of
Miss
Anville.
In
both
Burney
and
Evelina's
lives,
inheritance
practice and its associated language weave in and out of
their
respective
relationships.
Burney
witnessed
problematic elopements, including her father's;
endured
inheritance problems with her stepmother; and was herself
the object of the courtship of an eligible young man. The
complications and family upheavals caused by such events
as
these
helped
to
develop
in
Burney
ambivalence concerning her position
a
sense
of
in society. Evelyn
Farr tells us that Burney used Maria Allenfs, her halfsisterfs f
secret marriage as an example and did 'commit
the particulars to paper
heroinefs
difficulties
. . .
in Evelina, where all the
arise
from
her
father's
repudiation of a secret marriage to her mother on the
Continent," though Maria's
own life, unfortunately, did
not have such a fitting romantic ending (16).
Evelina
witnessed
family,
inheritance
problems
in
her
own
especially through her grandmother, and she developed a
sense of her own ambivalence regarding Mr. Villars, who
seems overly reluctant to prove her identity and recoup
her true inheritance.
Evelina' s ambivalence and
Villars'
reluctance are
heightened by the silence surrounding the characters of
Evelina.
the
Unlike the unceasing vitriol spewed throughout
letters
silences.
of
Clarissa,
Evelina
gives
us
uneasy
Villars fails to speak out regarding Evelina's
identity or her motherfs or her grandfatherfs.
to tell his side of the family history.
He fails
He fails to warn
Evelina of impending danger, and fails to keep her safe.
The text, significantly, tells the story of his silence.
Once Villars establishes his position with Lady Howard
and Evelina, very few of the letters thereafter are his.
On the other hand, others whom Evelina meets also keep
their
silence
regarding
their
motives,
their
own
legacies, and their desires to further their legacies.
While
much
is
silence,
Burney's
eighteenth-century
readers would have understood the unstated.
However,
even such astute modern critics as Ian Watt perpetuate a
silence about Evelina and Burney that has continued until
just recently.
Watt mentions Frances Burney five times in The Rise
of
the
Novel.
Sterne.
He
sandwiches
her
between
Defoe
Yet, Evelina is not mentioned at all.
Burney's
works
is
discussed.
However,
and
None of
when
Watt
discusses Burney in relation to Austen, he admits Austen
finished the work that Burney began
(298).
In his last
chapter, Watt suggests that both Burney and Austen are
key to the legacy of female authorship.
Watt admits that
Burney was "no inconsiderable figure in bringing together
the divergent directions which the geniuses of Richardson
and
Fielding
has
imposed
upon
the
novel"
(296).
Nevertheless, Evelina, as wildly popular as Pamela and
Robinson Crusoe, remains unexamined in The Rise of the
Novel.
Indeed,
even
Virginia
Woolf
declared
that,
"Austen should have laid a wreath upon the grave of Fanny
Burney
. . ."
(72).
Marjorie Dobbin, however, effectively fills in some
of
the
lingering
silence
surrounding
Burneyrs
works.
Dobbin posits that eighteenth-century novels written by
women were instruments of social criticism, and women's
situations
at
criticism (43).
the
time
were
a
good
choice
for
such
Certainly, Evelina raises many questions
regarding
women's
places
in
society.
Burney
also
questions artificial standards set for women by a rigid
patriarchal system of marriage and inheritance.
In the same vein, John Richetti asserts that novels
tend to resist what their representations uncover about
social relations.
mid-
to
He claims the sentimental novel of the
late-eighteenth
century
revulsion with the moral
marks
"an
extensive
compromises enforced in such
(117).
negotiations for identity"
Richetti continues,
confirming Johnsonfs idea of a "new realistic novel," in
that the characters of eighteenth-century novels become
"exceptions
to
the
prevailing
social
rules"
(116).
Authors mold their plots from real life, but novelistic
situations represent events less than ideal, ones that
make
good
lessons
for
Johnsonfs
'young,
idle
and
ignorant."
Richetti
tension
suggests that
created
between
these novels
the
"private
deal
self
with
and
a
its
communal surroundings, mutually defining and qualifying
relationships
that
dramatize
an
inevitable
interdependence between private self and public society"
(116).
The tension between public sphere and private
individuals was certainly a palpable part of eighteenthcentury society.
Burneyfs world was full of this kind of
tension,
and
she
reflects
it
in
her
novels.
More
specifically, she calls attention to it in her preface to
Evelina when
she reflects on her personal
and public
\\namelessness," her reluctance to share her private work
with the public.
Unlike Richardson, who worked hard to make all his
writing
didactic,
Burneyfs wish
for
a
goal
her
shared
by
Johnson,
first published
novel
Frances
is more
difficult to define. Caroline Evelyn's fiery demise could
not
keep her creator from narrating the education of
Caroline's
daughter in the eighteenth-century marriage
market.
Campbell
cites
the
similarity
between
Burney's
father, her literary fathers, and Mr. Villars, all of
whom subscribe to "the code of feminine propriety," which
clashes
with
patriarchal
Burney's
mentors,
"competitive project"
stated
as
well
(322).
need
as
to
present
society,
her
with
a
Thus, Burney' s project is
filled with overtones of dominant male language, and her
own ambivalent views affect her ability to perform as the
guardian
of
didactic
wish
Richardson's.
her
for
creation,
her
Evelina,
novel
much
making
more
Burney's
subtle
than
Kristina Straub, Julia Epstein and Patricia Meyer
Spacks
all
claim
Evelina
as
a
novel
of
dichotomies,
pitting city against country, public against private, and
most
importantly, author
against
three appreciate Evelina's
character. While
all
status as a young woman of
quality grievously deprived of her rightful position as
heir to Sir John Belmont, none addresses directly the
important roles inheritance and strict settlement play in
constructing
the
primary
plot
of
the
novel
and
its
character, or how inheritance practice forces her into an
mis-identified position.
all
the
other
What is more, not only she, but
characters
as
well,
are
in
such mis-
identified positions throughout the novel, and critics
have not touched on how their mis-identifications play on
Evelina's
ability
to
become
herself,
with
identity, and with her true inheritance.
her
own
None of the
three, Straub, Epstein or Spacks, explores the importance
the
language
of
inheritance plays
characters and plot direction.
to
look
specifically
at
in
the
actions
of
This study is the first
inheritance
power it wields in Burneyrs novel.
language
and
the
Mentoring Ms. Burney
Frances Burney was raised on the edge of the upper
classes.
Charles Burneyrs position put her in contact
with the aristocratic and the bohemian, the rich and the
poor.
Her own position as Second Keeper of the Robes for
Queen Charlotte served to solidify her position
woman
of
quality,
financial future
but
it
did
little
to
as a
resolve
(Doody Introduction xvi).
her
"Quality"
women, such as those Doody classes with Frances Burney,
had a chance to marry young and well if they could bring
a portion to their marriage.
This was not the case with
the Burney sisters.
Further, Frances Burney and her sisters had firsthand knowledge of the pitfalls of upper-class marriage.
They knew their stepmother brought a goodly portion to
her marriage with Charles Burney.
widow in love with him.
and
position,
the
She was a wealthy
Though she boasted of her wealth
largest
portion
of
Mrs.
Burney's
settlement from her first marriage was in trust reserved
for
her
daughter,
children,
an
enough
heiress.
money
Mrs.
to
Allen
make
Maria,
inherited
her
forty
thousand pounds, but lost it in bad investments before
she married Charles Burney.
The reputation of her money,
however, remained with her.
She and her sons managed
the children's trust, and when she could get her hands on
some of the money, she quickly squandered it, showing,
along with her secret marriage
to Charles Burney, her
impulsive nature that she trait shared with her children.
Maria would also impulsively run away and marry secretly.
Indeed,
her
step-sister
Frances
called
Maria's
love
affair a "novel" (Kilpatrick 26-27,33,34) .
Burney
would
certainly
have
come
away
from
such
experiences with a decidedly negative view of marriage
portions.
She
also would
have
cause to
suspect
the
underlying reasoning families used to make "successful"
marriage
encounter
matches.
many
necessitated
During
family
her
her
youth,
situations
thinking
long
and
Burney
that
hard
would
about
would
have
the
language and power of quality.
Burney was unable to resolve emotional upheavals in
her own life regarding marriage, class and profession.
Most critics agree that Burney's
her
personal
anguish
marriage practice.
regarding
works portray much of
women,
society
and
Julia Epstein insists these upheavals
translated into anger, defiance, and a "self-conscious
authorship" in her work
(Voices 163).
Backing up her
point, Epstein quotes Mr. Delville in Cecilia:
And let me counsel you to remember that a lady,
whether
so
called
from
birth
or
only
from
fortune, should never degrade herself by being
put on a level with writers, and such sort of
people. (186)
Epstein wishes to emphasize Mr. Delvillefs repudiation of
writers and "such sort of people."
Mr.
Delvillefs definition
of
a
options-birth and fortune-neither
My study emphasizes
lady.
He
gives
two
of which Burney could
lay claim to, but both of which were the hidden legacies
of Evelina Anville.
nature
of
His words highlight the insidious
inheritance
language,
for
all
hinged
upon
birth, title, or fortune.
A
wealth)
marriage
or
an
portion
(associated
inheritance
with
(associated with
birth
title
and
and
wealth) ultimately dictated, and also limited, a woman's
place in society. Burney plays out, as Epstein calls it,
her
"conflicted
novels,
and
sense
especially
of
in
self"
in
Evelina,
the
pages
where
of
her
author
and
character are both in search of their rightful places
(Voices 174) .
The language of inheritance is duplicitous within
Evelina.
It is used both for and against the successful
arrival of Evelina to her rightful place within society.
Individual worth was part of Burney's
she wrote.
consciousness as
The voices of those who surround Evelina are
troubling at best.
Those closest to her often seem to be
those who cause her the most harm.
Principal among them
is Mr. Villars.
Guarding Evelina
Holy among men is Mr. Villars.
the eyes
of
Patricia Meyers
He is "virtuous" in
Spacks,
"paternal,"
"private" for David Oakleaf (177,353,355).
and
Mr. Villars,
however, is more problematic than good when his personal
relationship with inheritance and its language come under
scrutiny.
As Julia Epstein observes in The Iron Pen,
"Villars' character and his motives are perhaps the least
examined in this novel, and
critics have
ignored him
precisely because they have assumed his benignity" (103).
First, we must consider the problem of his name.
Evelina Anville
is anagrammatic of her
true name,
If
as
suggested by Doody, Pawl and others, one can see easily
that Villars is closely suggestive of "villain" or even
"villein."
when
Considering Villars as a villain has merit
we view his actions regarding his
Evelyn
family
charges and the fatal ends of the first two and the near
disaster for the third, our heroine.
of
his
name
to
"villein"
The approximation
turns
up
interesting
associations, as well.
According to the OED, a villein was a peasant who
was subject to his lord and manor
(3580).
Amy
Pawl
speaks of the importance of names in Evelina, claiming,
"Evelina must learn
. . .
may be misapplied" (285).
that names are arbitrary and
Pawl also argues that because
Evelina was refused her father's name, she became "more
absolutely Villars'
possession"
(285).
therefore, is as important as Evelina' s.
Villars'
name,
Mr. Villars is
the servant, a subject of the Evelyn family.
He is a
villein assigned to the Evelyn family estate for life.
Evelina, however, by being denied her own name, becomes a
subject of Mr. Villars; as Pawl suggests, she becomes his
"possession,"
a
subject, a
servant
to Villars,
whose
every effort seems concentrated on controlling her every
move.
Mr. Villars, the beloved tutor of John Evelyn and
Caroline Evelyn, assumes charge of the third generation
of Evelyns. One cannot help but notice through his own
accounting of the Evelyn family events that he had the
power to right wrongs that had occurred.
His reticence
about his seeming disservice to the Evelyn children's
needs
should
narrative.
well
warn
reader
of
lapses
within
his
Reverend Villars seems to move in a cloak of
meaning,
kindly
the
or
charm.
perhaps,
However,
well-studied,
if
we
look
at
blundering,
him
through
eighteenth-century inheritance practice, we can ascertain
several very important characteristics that he himself
fails to tell.
First, Mr.
Villars most likely is from a wealthy
family, either upper middle class or minor aristocracy.
His close ties with Lady Howard provide clues to his most
likely being among the privileged.
Primogeniture, the
elevation of the first son as the primary inheritor of
estate lands in a family, was certainly in effect during
the youth of Mr. Villars.
It was the keystone of strict
settlement, imposing a rigid, unchangeable line of male
heirs to inherit an estate at the death of the owner or
at the resettlement of the estate at the majority or
marriage
of
the
eldest
male
child,
went
to
which
also
was
practiced in his youth.
Because
all
realty
the
eldest
son
at
majority or marriage in strict settlement practice and
primogeniture, Mr.
Villars was probably
third
wealthy
son
of
aristocracy.
a
merchant
the second or
family
or
minor
It would also be reasonable to consider Mr.
Villars as the product of a marriage like that of John
Evelyn or even a second or third marriage, one that would
resemble
that
of
Burney's
own
father,
with
Villars
occupying the same sort of position as Burney herself, a
second son or daughter of a wealthy step- parent. The
death
of
either
of
his
parents
and
a
subsequent
remarriage would have relegated him to the position of
stepchild to at least one of his parents.
Had his mother
remarried, he well could have been pushed even farther
down the ladder of inheritance.
could easily
imagine
More chillingly, one
him as the younger brother of a
Robert Lovelace in Clarissa, left parentless early in
life
and
beholden
to
a
controlling,
powerful
older
brother.
Mr. Villars would have had a good chance of having a
portion
settled
on
brother's
majority
settlement
became
him
at
or
marriage,
effective.
the
The
time
or
of
his
eldest
whenever
portion
would
the
have
bought him a position in the armed forces or a place at
university to study for a clerical position
97).
(Trumbach
Other than his education and a few connections, like
those with Lady Howard, Villars would have little to make
him comfortable in the world.
His position in the Evelyn
household would have been important to him, but what he
gains from that position is surrounded with a studied
silence.
Villars, as much as Evelina herself, edits what
he tells the reader.
In the beginning Villars tells us
only that a "legacy" of a thousand pounds was "left to"
him along with the sole guardianship of his "daughter's
person" by Mr. John Evelyn (14).
Most notably, Villars'
lack of detail in retelling the story leads the reader to
speculate whether Lady Howard knows the true details and
they are understood, or whether Lady Howard, too, knows
only so much of the original story of the Evelyn family
as Villars wishes to tell. No matter the truth of the
situation, the reader is still left in the dark regarding
certain details pertaining to the original Evelyn story.
With regard to the legacy from John Evelyn, the lack of
detail,
the
silence
on
the
part
of
Villars
is
an
excellent example of Villars' equivocal treatment of his
present and past charges.
Mr. Villars does not tell us whether the money was
given for him personally or for him to use in caring for
Mr. Evelynfs offspring in order to care for her.
There
is a distinction in having a legacy left to one rather
than left for another.
Villars writes that he would
educate John Evelyn's daughter, Caroline Evelyn; however,
for her fortune she would be "wholly dependent on her
mother,
to
whose
recommended her"
John Evelyn
tenderness
(14)
wanted
.
Villars
very much
[Evelyn]
explains
for his
earnestly
further that
daughter
to be
complete in her duty to her mother, and that her mother,
Madame
Duval, was the one derelict in duty.
Villars
leaves much to be explained about his behavior and Madame
Duval's
and about Caroline Evelyn's
legacy and his own.
In other words, according to Villars, John Evelyn left
Villars one thousand pounds and the upbringing of his
daughter, but he left his daughter nothing but Villars
and the prospect of inheriting from her mother. Villars,
in turn, leaves the reader nothing but his silence.
Villars studied for the church and probably looked
forward to a decent living, but he did not end up in a
parish.
Margaret
Anne
Doody
remarks
that
wealthy
families assigned a tutor as a traveling companion for
their
sons
Wealthy
when
they
went
on
the
Grand
Tour
(454).
families would depend on the educated younger
sons of other wealthy families to be tutors to their
children.
We can safely assume that Villars is educated
and from the upper classes if he is chosen to guide and
tutor Mr. Evelyn.
Wealthy families also hired tutors to teach their
sons
the
duties
and
responsibilities
a
son
owed
his
family, his estate, and his society. The tutor often came
from the clergy.
honour
to
Mr. Villars relates that he had "the
accompany Mr.
Evelyn
. . .
when
upon
his
travels, in the capacity of tutor," so that we could
assume from his own words that he was not the family
tutor (14). The Evelyn family may have hired Mr. Villars
specifically to accompany Mr. Evelyn.
His knowledge of
the continent and the manners of European culture would
have provided valuable lessons for Mr. Evelyn.
Possibly, however, he could actually have been the
live-in tutor of Mr. Evelyn.
that
the
education
of
the
Villars finally tells us
"father,
daughter,
and
granddaughter" all devolved to him, and the first two
caused him great misery
(16).
hired to be John Evelyn's
Was Villars originally
traveling companion and then
made his tutor, was he already the tutor accompanying his
pupil on the Grand Tour?
This may seem to be begging the
question; however, had Villars been hired as a traveling
companion, he was sorely inadequate in his duties as he
let his charge go astray.
His knowledge of Europe and of
the dangers
traveling on the Continent may
beyond his educational scope.
for his
job,
for he was
have been
He, then, was ill prepared
as innocent of
life on
the
Continent as was Evelyn. Not telling the Evelyns of his
lack of expertise would have been a conscious omission on
his part.
On the other hand, had he been Evelyn's tutor before
the Grand Tour, then he should have been more prepared
for the
trip and
its dangers.
Unpreparedness would,
then, have been a conscious failing his part.
Either
way, Villars had to have made a conscious decision to
leave out information when dealing with the Evelyns and
their son.
The misery
Villars
was
not
the
due
first
two
so much
Evelyn
to
the
children
actions
caused
of
the
children in his care as to his own faulty guidance.
As
their tutor and mentor, he was responsible for helping
them make the proper decisions for their futures.
not know what he did.
We do
His parceling out of information
obscures his own history and muddies the history of the
Evelyn family, relegating the only legacy that Evelina
has as she enters her seventeenth year to what Epstein
identifies as "dialogic silence and white space" (Voices
163).
Susan Greenfield points out that Villars "candidly
tells
Evelina
withholds
the
this
Greenfield
accurate
details
information
blames
from
Villars
in
of
the
part
her
past,
public"
for
but
(307).
Evelina's
disinheritance, citing that he "effectively secluded and
buried her story," affirming he is the one responsible
for
the
secrecy
observes
that
surrounding
Villars
her
(307).
participates
Greenfield
in
Evelina's
disinheritance "unwittingly," yet she also asserts that
he deliberately withheld knowledge of her existence from
the reformed Belmont in order for Evelina to "develop
into an ideal domestic woman," believing she must stay
home with him in order to become one
tells Lady Howard, "
. . .
(307).
Villars
this deserted child, though
legally [the] heiress of two large fortunes, must owe all
her
rational
(20).
expectations to
adoption and
friendship"
He does not tell her why. Nor does he tell Lady
Howard or the reader whether Evelina is aware of her
position as heiress, either.
Greenfield seems reticent to grant that Mr. Villars,
through his position as a younger son and servant to
another family, as well as the inheritor of a thousand
pounds,
Evidence
is
shrewder
supports the
than
idea
she
wishes
that
to
Villars
credit
him.
intentionally
misuses his position and the directives of his charges,
wishing them to partake in his own narrow thinking rather
than pursue the dictates of their rightful inheritances.
Villars is a servant of the Evelyn family; he does
receive an income for his position, and later, he does
inherit
a
thousand
Caroline Evelyn.
pounds
Villars'
plus
the
guardianship
of
first failure as subject and
servant to John Evelyn is to allow him to marry beneath
his station and then to leave the newly married young man
in Paris while he himself remains in England.
Evelyn, on
his deathbed, implores Villars, "My friend! Forget your
resentment, in favour of your humanity!"
(14).
Villars
tells us that John Evelyn was seduced into marrying and
then felt compelled to flee to France with the future
Madame Duval, 'then
a waiting girl at a tavern," in order
to escape gossip (14).
Villars does not tell us why he
was resentful, or why he remained in England.
Epstein's
dialogic silences are again at work, though one can go
much further.
Villars remains silent with John Evelyn,
letting him go to France with
silent when Evelyn's
his wife.
He remains
daughter is left in France to die,
and he remains silent when Evelina becomes deathly ill in
face of the affront she receives from Lord Orville.
each
case, Villars
hesitates
to act,
or
even make
In
a
decision, and then leaves his charge to do what each of
them thinks best.
serious
that
Evelinafs health finally becomes so
Villars
forces
Selwyn to Bristol Wells.
Evelina
to
go
with
Mrs.
This is the first time in three
generations that he makes a pro-active decision for one
of his charges.
However, he still keeps silent regarding
her real identity, and he does nothing to remedy the
social mistake that causes the precipitous decline in her
health.
In the
case of John Evelyn,
Evelyn
and
the marriage
occurs
immediately
upon
Continent.
Whatever good Villars is to have done his
Villars'
return
from
the
pupil, he obviously fails him, a failure compounded by
not
following
Evelyn
to
France.
Evelyn's
plea
for
Villars to let go of his resentment is a good indication
that Villars does not fulfill his duty to his charge, but
rather prefers to remain at home after Evelyn must flee
to France after the marriage in order to escape public
humiliation.
Villars, even while Evelyn is dying, fails
to do his duty toward his charge and hangs on to his
resentment and spite, sending an emissary in his stead to
assume
charge
of
Evelyn's
young
daughter.
If
Judith
Lowder Newtonfs premise of power in Burneyfs novels is
true, that "[menf s] power
. . .
almost always takes the
form of force or control in social situations
. . . ,
ff
then we can fairly label Villars as a powerless man (11).
Villars fails to raise John Evelyn to the station he
rightly deserves, no matter how Villars protests to Lady
Howard
the
excellency
of
the
young man,
exhibited "unblemished conduct" (14).
and
that
he
If that were true,
why did Villars harbor such resentment toward Evelyn and
abandon him in his dire hour of need?
There are many of
Epstein's
Villars
explain.
"white
spaces"
here
that
fails
to
How does a young man go from paragon to paradox
so quickly?
Similarly, Mr. Villars, as so often pointed
out, fails in his narrative to explain his own conduct.
John Evelyn's
father feels it necessary to provide
an education for his eldest son. Though he seems to be
following the advice of Locke on the matter of educating
sons, his choice of tutor is flawed.
The theme of a
benevolent and wise father guiding not only the country,
but the home as well is subverted by the choice of the
Reverend Mr. Villars as John Evelyn's tutor.
Mr. Villars
is a reverend because he is not the eldest son, and his
portion
cannot
support
anything
else.
He
necessarily in his profession by his own choice.
of
gaining
wisdom
and
"excellent
character"
is
not
Instead
from
the
Reverend Mr. Villars to guide him through his youth into
a position as the head of his family, John Evelyn falls
into dissipation and destruction, far away from the man
hired to provide the education and guidance he needed to
protect him from such things (14).
Additionally, the mistakes Villars makes with Evelyn
are
about
to
be
compounded
on
his
daughter,
as
the
product of John Evelyn's marriage to a barmaid would not
be
welcome
in the Evelyn household.
Caroline Evelyn
comes to Villars through the force of inheritance law.
Though Evelyn begs Villars to lay aside his resentment,
he knows that Villars may be the only one he can turn to
for his daughter's protection.
No one wants the barmaid
mother to be in a position to use Caroline's
neither father nor family.
leave
England
outcry
because
against
really,
except
of
Evelyn, however, has had to
public,
his marriage.
for
fortune,
Villars,
as
There
to
care
well
as
is no
for
family,
one
the
left,
child.
Evelyn, also, though he feels Villars' resentment, still
reveres his mentor and trusts his judgment and friendship
to some degree, all of which is acknowledged through his
deathbed plea. Evelyn' s final words, however, do nothing
to
establish
however.
Villars'
appropriateness
He writes, " 0 Villars!
me!" (14).
as
Hear pity!
his
choice,
And relieve
Again, there is a part
suppressed by Villars.
relieve
Evelyn
instead.
of
His
He is supposed to go to France to
the
child.
reticence
wherever he may
of the narrative that is
to
have been
He
leave
sends
the
an
emissary
Evelyn
home
or
is never explained, but
it
serves to establish his "hands-off" approach to dealing
with
problems,
and
certainly
lends
a
plausible
explanation to his reluctance to leave Berry Hill years
later in order to protect Caroline Evelyn from Madame
Duval,
or
Evelina
from
her
grandmother,
or
even
to
participate in Evelina's marriage.
Caroline Evelyn is "bequeathed" to him (14).
knows
Madame
that
leaving
his
child
with
Villars
Evelyn
precludes
Duval having recourse to the Evelyn family, or
their fortune, or Caroline's
inheritance.
In a sense,
then, Evelyn is asking Villars to relieve the name of
Evelyn from its connection to Madame Duval.
Worth noting at this point is that Caroline Evelyn,
with the force of her inheritance from her father with
her,
becomes
a
force
While
strict settlement provided
also
provided
for
in
only
settlement
was
inheriting
daughters,
to
as
an
heiress.
for younger sons, it
daughters.
introduced
but
society
rid
heiresses
Truly,
strict
inheritance
were
of
inevitable
(Spring 8-38).
economic
and
Villars'.
Caroline Evelyn is a prime example.
class
power
is
much
stronger
He knows that instinctively.
than
Her
Mr.
Caroline Evelyn,
however, did not live long enough to use her inheritance.
She died right after the birth of her daughter.
Her
inheritance would become the property of her daughter,
Evelina,
another heiress; but
she, too,
is
kept from
receiving her due.
Villars,
as
a
second son, may
seem as powerless
legally as both Caroline and Evelina.
himself
holds
Evelina's
the
power
of
However, Villars
Caroline's
demise
and
misidentification. While Caroline and Evelina
may have been heiresses, Villars was still a male with
the power of guardianship over both.
As such, he did not
even need to do anything in order to do much.
Doing
nothing to help Caroline, he contributed to her hasty
death; and with Evelina, he held the key to her identity
and did nothing with it.
Caroline Evelyn, then, becomes something of a second
son, like Villars.
She is the second gift of the second
generation to Mr. Villars.
He is bestowed with the cast-
off of the second family.
The daughter of this family,
even
if
choice
Mr.
of
Evelyn
wife,
had
could
not
never
abhorred
have
his
belonged
unfortunate
to
Madame
Duval, since all goods and chattel, including children,
belonged to the husband.
Caroline Evelyn is the cast-off
legacy of the Evelyns inherited by Mr. Villars.
Evelina
becomes
family to Villars.
the
third
bequest
of
the
Evelyn
For the third time, unfortunately,
Mr. Villars is not the tutor or mentor he should be or
could be
for this fated family.
becomes
complicated
Howard,
. . .
\\
questions
England;
for
in
I
his
the principal
correspondence
have
detaining
Again, his language
weighty,
her
nay
daughter
of which
is,
with
Lady
unanswerable
at
that
present
in
it was
the
earnest desire of one to whose Will she owes implicit
duty"
(13).
Here is more of Epstein's
white
spaces.
Villars implies that Evelina must be dutiful and remain
in England by
the
"desire of one to whose Will"
should feel obedience.
she bend?
But to whom?
she
To whose will must
Speculation brings three answers:
The wishes
of her dead mother, the wishes of her dead grandfather,
and the wishes of Villars himself.
Villars could well be
the answer, and he would be more than willing to use the
third person
in order
to assure
his
humble
place
as
guardian and tutor, chosen by the other two to raise the
less
than
Villars
illustrious
holds
the
children
answer,
but
of
the
Evelyn
he
remains
family.
silent,
as
always, willing to "obey custom rather than conscience, "
as Epstein observes (Iron Pen 104).
Amy Paul's
names
in
influential essay on the importance of
Evelina
does
not
address
ambiguous pronouns within the text.
the
importance
of
Villars constantly
disrupts his message to Lady Howard, leaving the reader
to make judgment on the duplicity of his language and to
regularly speculate about whom he may be speaking of.
As in Clarissa, the reader is also caught having to
choose among the many meanings
Evelina. One
of the word
sees Evelina "bequeathed"
"will"
in
or "willed"
to
Villars, but one also sees Villars exercising his "will"
as surrogate father to this child.
'willful"
Villars decidedly is
when he declares to Lady Howard that Evelina,
"shall never, while life is lent me, know the loss she
has
sustained"
(16).
Villars
has
the power
to
keep
Evelina from her grandmother, from her identity, and from
her fortune.
He also has the power to reveal her real
identity, send her wherever he wants or keep her home and
present her with bona fides in his possession to her real
father and her proper
fortune and station.
Villars
constantly warns Evelina that a womanfs reputation is her
most
coveted
virtue,
essential
reputation, since a "woman's
to
preserving
her
reputation, once shattered,
is not to be repaired"
(Pawl 285).
Without her true
name, however, Evelina's
reputation is as a bastard, a
pretty, young woman who shall remain nameless, not from
her own doing or her family' s f but by the choice of her
guardian, the Reverend Mr. Villars.
Joanne
Cutting-Gray
accurately
summarizes
the
pivotal ideas of namelessness and reputation for Evelina,
telling us
minor-a
that,
"Her
position
as
a nameless,
female
form of social s i l e n c e ~ e n e r a t e sthe conflict of
the novel"
(44).
The implication of Evelina being a
"nameless, female minor" goes well beyond her innocence
and social ambiguity.
Name can only be bestowed through
legal documents and recognized legal acts.
Villars is in
possession of the document that can change Evelina's life
by changing her name, but he suppresses it, just as his
language suppresses her will and his real intentions.
Villarsf reasons for leaving Evelina nameless and
innocent
of her
past
are
imbued with
conscious
self-
incrimination as he writes to Lady Howard, "A youthful
mind is seldom totally free from ambition; to curb that,
is
the
first
step
to
contentment,
since
to
expectations, is to increase enjoyment" (19).
diminish
These are
the arguments of a younger son desperately trying to find
solace in his secondary position.
After years of silent
recitation and finally believing them himself, Villars
applies
them
to
his
final
charge.
Julia
Epstein' s
assertion that Villars is "motivated by a concern for
wealth over righteous behavior"
lends support to this
speculation of his inner motivations (Iron Pen 104).
Villars'
reluctance
to
reveal
to
Evelina
her
identity is based on a logic that at best is subversive.
While he puzzles over the "sudden" appearance of a young
woman
purported
to
be
Sir
John
Belmont's
daughter,
Villars also feels that without a birth certificate to
prove her identity, Evelina would receive a "stigma which
will
eternally
mother" (374).
to
challenge
blame
the
fair
fame
of
her
virtuous
On the other hand, Villars feels no need
the birth
certificate of
the other Miss
Belmont .
In
the
same
breath,
Villars
argues
that
the
"appearance of a daughter of Sir John Belmont will revive
the remembrance of Miss Evelyn's
heard it"
(373).
story in all who have
There is no better
time than this
moment to approach Sir John with the letter from Caroline
and his own history.
Villars feels, however, that the
public will demand he reveal the identity of the mothers
of both Miss Belmonts.
This should not present a problem
for Villars if he were truly intent on the best future
and well being of his charge.
The problem with Villars
is the convoluted thinking and
employs
to
explain
to himself
subversive language he
and
to
the
world
that
Evelina's position in his world is in her best interests.
There may be those who know Caroline Evelyn's story.
If so, they would understand that she claims to have been
married to Sir John Belmont, and that she is the mother
of the real daughter.
There would be no need for Villars
to reveal the mother's identity.
who know Miss Evelyn's
In the same vein, those
story and do not believe that she
was married to Sir John would already have stigmatized
Caroline, and her memory would not be one of "fair fame,"
as Villars like to think (374).
Evelina's
Without
proper
reputation
is
credentials,
already
Evelina's
in
question.
upbringing
and
family history are left to speculation and gossip.
Lovel
and
is
Willoughby
immediately
assume
that
Evelina
a
lovely bastard, a toy not to be taken seriously in the
marriage market society of London.
There
are
those who
know the
story of
Sir
John
Belmont and Miss Evelyn, and they make it unlikely that
such a small community of upper class landed gentry and
nobility, especially someone such as Lovel, who prides
himself on knowing everything about everyone, would be
ignorant
of
this
one
young
woman,
or
of
Sir
John
Belmont's past and the daughter he now has with him.
While trying to persuade Evelina to come home to him
permanently and retire to country life, Villars assures
her that time is of the essence to reveal her true past,
"since the longer this mystery is suffered to continue,
the
more
(374).
with
difficult
may
be
rendered
its
explanation"
After seventeen years, time finally catches up
Villars,
who
has
tried
desperately
beginning never to reveal Evelina's
from
identity.
the
He has
hidden away the letter written by Caroline Evelyn, the
one piece of textual proof of Evelina's
Evelina and her father.
identity, from
He states in ambiguous terms
that it, "behoves us to enquire" about the matter (373).
He
continues
to
write
from
Berry
Hill,
reluctant
as
always to come to the aid of an Evelyn, and for the third
time in as many generations, the Reverend Mr.
leaves
his
charge
to
meet
her
fate
alone
Villars
(373).
Ultimately, the paper will not convince Sir John Belmont
of Evelina's
identity; her striking resemblance to her
mother
a
will,
spoken of by
resemblance that is not
any other character
recognized or
in the book.
Lady
Howard, Mr. Villars, Captain and Mrs. Mirvan, and Madame
Duval all would have seen the resemblance.
Others in
London society may also have noted the resemblance, but
none speaks of it.
Evelina inherited her mother's
face,
the one unshakeable truth of her identity.
The job of tutors and guardians like Mr. Villars was
to protect their charges from predators.
Madame Duval
and Sir John Belmont were two such predators for John and
Caroline Evelyn.
Both beasts of prey, one poor and one
rich, were looking to enhance their financial and social
standings
match.
by
secretly
marrying
a
seemingly
excellent
Now both are in London while Evelina is there.
Villars knows the double dangers for his third charge; he
remains
recalcitrant,
and
he
does
not
explain
his
decision.
John Evelyn certainly holds true to the estimations
of Madame Duval, but he soon discovered what a horrid
mistake he has made in secretly marrying her.
In the
next generation, Sir John Belmont is expecting a large
portion to come with his marriage to Caroline Evelyn.
When none develops, he quickly and quietly destroys what
little evidence there is of his marriage to Caroline.
Had Villars not been ineffective and weak at his job, one
can easily
see that much
of Evelina's
family history
would have been very different and much more successful.
One cannot fathom the Evelyn family's continuing faith
in Villars'
abilities unless one realizes the influence
Lady Howard had in his favor over the years.
Her good
will and the reluctance of the Evelyns to have anything
to do with the offspring produced by
John Evelyn and
Caroline Belmont keep Villars in his job.
The scandals
had already brought enough trouble to the Evelyn family.
Mr.
Villars'
behavior
can
be
nothing
less
than
suspect in relation to his position within the Evelyn
family, whose offspring are all in his charge, and who
all meet with harrowing circumstances.
the three are dead.
Below
the
Indeed, two of
surface of a
loving,
doting relationship, the legacy Villars holds for Evelina
is laced with danger. Villars rarely moves to protect his
charges
or
interests.
Indeed, his
decision
to allow
Evelina to travel to London without him underscores years
of leaving his charges to their own devises when trouble
comes near.
Her mother and grandfather traveled without
Villars and found themselves at the end of their lives
because of it.
Additionally, Villars knows that Evelina
does not have recourse to the legacy that would give her
entrance to the London marriage market.
Evelina
will
received
only
a
hundred
He tells us that
pounds
a
year
inheritance (14).
Yet, he allows her to go off with the
granddaughter of a titled and well-respected woman.
Miss Mirvan goes to London because she is in the
very market that excludes Evelina.
source of Evelina's
Notwithstanding the
money, her legacy is not enough to
present her in decent society and make her a contender
for a strong marriage.
Eileen Spring argues forcefully
that
resulted
strict
among
settlement
wealthy
sons
of
the
in
a
aristocracy
marked
to
hunting ("Law, Economy and Society" 170-2) .
is
in
a
position
to
take
advantage
of
tendency
go
heiress
Miss Mirvan
this
trend.
Evelina's pittance by no means qualifies her for any such
thing.
Lady Howard knows this.
Even Miss Mirvan knows this.
others have dealt with Evelina's
Mr. Villars knows this.
Joanne Cutting-Gray and
innocence, but they do
not make note that Evelina seems to be the only one of
this group who does not understand that she is going to
London
as
a
handmaiden,
or,
at
best,
a
traveling
companion to Miss Mirvan (43-55).
Evelina' s position mirrors Mr. Villars' position. He
began his career as a companion to Mr. Evelyn, traveling
to Europe with him. Now he discharges his paternal duties
by raising Evelina to do and be the same. He commends her
to the Mirvans with his blessing, a blessing stronger and
more powerful than any apprehension he may have for her
safety or her future.
He sends her as a companion and
servant, not as an entity in her own right.
Evelina's
mother was left to go alone to France to Madame Duval,
left to her own devices in her marriage, then finally
left alone to deal with the conception of her child, the
denial
of
her
marriage,
and
her
own
eventual
death.
Villars, as the passive observer of those events, should
have
had
the
common
sense
to
decide
that
Evelina,
perhaps, should not be allowed to go to London without
him.
He compounds his incredible reluctance to act with
his
knowledge
of
Madame
Duval
and
her
capabilities,
knowing she is lurking in London, threatening to contact
her
granddaughter.
Susan
Greenfield
declares
Madame
. . .
barely
less destructive" than Caroline Evelyn' s father
(313).
Duval "a vulgar woman and dangerous parent
Once Evelina is out of reach of Mr. Villars, she has no
effective guardian and no mentor available to her until
she meets Mrs. Selwyn.
Lady Howard and her daughter, Mrs. Mirvan, do not
want to advise Evelina.
Mirvan,
who
is
London
Evelina is a companion to Miss
to
enter
the
marriage
market.
Captain Mirvan has little or no interest in any woman,
Solutions from Mrs. Selwyn
As both Caroline Evelyn in legacy and Evelina in
social position mirror Mr. Villars, so Villars mirrors
Mrs. Selwyn in family duty.
side
of
Villars'
Mrs. Selwyn is the public
private
image.
She,
however,
is
triumphant in her duties, unlike the good reverend.
Timothy
Dykstal
relates
Jiirgen
Habermas's
theoretical determinations of public and private spheres
emerging
in
extraordinary
Evelina.
"social
the
eighteenth
and
often
century
subversive
to
Mrs.
Selwyn's
position
within
Dykstal defines Habermas's public sphere as the
space where
the eighteenth-century bourgeoisie
exchanged opinions, came to understand itself, and gained
the
esteem
to
challenge
aristocracyff (559).
the
domination
of
the
Villars would never have been able
to deal with a public sphere described so, for if, as
this
study
aristocracy,
suggests,
he
Villars
certainly
would
challenge to the aristocracy.
was
not
born
have
into
minor
accepted
a
As it was, Villars did not
"exchange opinions" with others, no matter their class.
For Dykstal, the "extraordinary thing" about Mrs. Selwyn
is that she is the only character in the novel able to
enact a
critical
function in the public
sphere. That
let alone Evelina.
Willoughby and Love1 do not want to
advise Evelina, as they are more interested in using her.
The
Branghtons
Evelina
and
want
bring
only
her
to
compare
to their
themselves
level.
with
Orville must
remain socially aloof in order to guard his interest in
her,
and
he
can only advise
her
clandestinely,
as
a
brother.
Villars
should
marriageable years.
inheritance
be
Evelina
through
her
He, however, is the product of the
system as
wealthy family.
guiding
the
second
son of a relatively
His position in life is also a product
of the inheritance system.
He is the legal guardian of
two of the three Evelyn children, as he has "inherited"
them through the dying wishes of their only interested
parent. His reluctance to do so is deeply troubling and
mysterious.
Mr.
Villars
squanders
his
"inheritance"
several times over. As Evelina finds herself dangerously
close to losing her reputation and her health, her savior
comes in female form. Mrs. Selwyn is the only character
in the novel free of social conventions, and she is freer
than
Villars
Evelina.
travel.
to
give
sincere
and
solid
guidance
to
After all, she, unlike Villars, is willing to
of
her
own"
(300).
Evelina
tells
Miss
Mirvan
that
Villars does not like Selwyn because of her "unmerciful
propensity to satire," yet he was able to overcome his
personal feelings once again to allow Selwyn to escort
Evelina
in order
to
get her
(300).
Mrs. Selwyn comes to life in the last two pages
of the second volume.
to Bristol
Wells
safely
Her introduction there secures her
an important place in the novel, for the last volume must
provide a resolution to the story of Evelina' s search for
a
name.
Selwyn will
guide
her
to
the
end
of
this
journey .
Julia
Shaffer
claims
desire for a mentor's
encounters,
that
because
of
Evelinafs
advice in all the situations she
Burney cannot help but revealing that, "even
the most virtuous males may be unable to grasp elements
of reality that women can perceive" and Evelina can only
act
when
she
departs
from
"male
knowledge
and
male
advice" (61). Mrs. Selwyn, a female capable of using the
dominant male language as her own, breaks Villars'
on Evelina.
hold
David Oakleaf argues that, "Burney suggests
that private character evades the binary oppositions of
public character," which allows Mrs. Selwyn the position
of Villarsf alter ego
(349).
Mrs.
Selwyn must
solve
Evelinafs identity crisis and set her on the road to her
Burney chose a woman and one of ambiguous social status
for the role is curious.
More curious is how Burney
characterizes her (560).
The reader never has a clear picture of Mrs. Selwyn,
since those who describe her or interact with her can do
so only with the prejudice of the age for women of her
ilk.
Epstein, however, speculates that "Burney uses her
to present a woman who is kind and compassionate to those
who
deserve
without
it
and
who
compromising
achieves
herself
personally" (Iron Pen 113) .
independent
either
status
socially
or
Mrs. Selwyn does all of this
and more.
Whereas
Mr.
Villars,
virtually
disembodied
throughout much of the novel, is secluded at Berry Hill,
Mrs.
Selwyn,
full-bodied
and
vital,
is
situated
comfortably within the public social sphere, though we
are
told
(191).
she
lives only
three miles
from Berry
Hill
In order to confirm a place for her in London
society, Burney describes her as "masculine," reinforcing
the
eighteenth-century
prejudice
about
women with "masculine" abilities (300).
strong
women,
Evelina goes on
with the description, telling Villars that, "her manners
deserve the same epithet; for in studying to acquire the
knowledge of the other sex, she has lost all the softness
identity and
name
and Orville and marriage.
Selwyn,
herself, however, represents a great deal more than alter
ego or family and marriage broker.
During the first
pages of Volume Three, Mrs. Selwyn saves Evelina from a
ruinous encounter with several young men on the way to
the Pump-Room.
Lovel,
Unlike Evelina's
Willoughby
neutralized
by
and
Mrs.
initial encounters with
Orville,
Selwyn's
this
stern
encounter
words
and
is
humor,
leaving Evelina relatively unscathed.
Mrs. Selwyn is a working example of what Burney, as
well
as
eighteenth-century
society
in
general,
would
expect to happen to a woman having too much money, too
much learning, and not enough male guidance.
of
Burney's
characters
who
exemplify
the
class lines through marriage or inheritance.
She is one
blurring
of
Mrs. Selwyn
describes her own position while telling Evelina about
Mrs.
Beaumont.
Mrs.
Selwyn
did
a
favor
for
Mrs.
Beaumont, who at the time thought Mrs. Selwyn was a woman
of
quality.
Mrs.
Selwyn
suspects
Mrs.
Beaumont
was
"miserable when she discovered me to be a mere country
gentlewoman"
(315).
comparison,
for
gentlewoman."
Evelina
she,
too,
cannot
is
fail to make
a
"mere
the
country
Mrs. Selwyn will always remain such, no
matter
her
inheritance;
only
patrilineage
can
elevate
Evelina, and it will.
Mrs.
Selwyn
advantageous
portion.
to
her
is
the
marriage
product
to
which
of
she
an
financially
brought
a
goodly
Her marriage, however, cannot give much cover
breeding
as
a
"country
gentlewoman,"
just
as
Captain Mirvan cannot overcome his own breeding. However,
as Joanne Cutting-Gray observes, Captain Mirvan and Mrs.
Selwyn are tolerated in upper class society because of
their marriages.
Madame Duval, however, is not, nor was
she when she married John Evelyn.
having
not
even
a whisper
She was a bar-maid,
of respect.
Her
breeding
cannot be overcome or tolerated by marriage, either in
England or in France.
tricks,
and
she
is
She is the butt of jokes and
made
to
pay
for
her
socially
outrageous behavior because of her lack of breeding.
Birth, breeding, title and wealth all are factors of
class identification in eighteenth-century England.
in
Evelina
are
miscast
because
of
Many
misidentification.
Mrs. Beaumont misidentifies Mrs. Selwyn, as pointed out
above,
and
Evelina
herself
is
misidentified
several
times.
Mrs. Selwyn, in speaking of Mrs. Beaumont asserts
that Mrs. Beaumont "thinks proper to be of opinion that
b i r t h and v i r t u e are one and the same thing"
(315). Her
uncanny perception is pivotal to Evelina's
identity and
the cause of Evelinafs frequent misidentifications (315).
First, Willoughby and Lovel identify her as a pretty
bastard, then the Branghtons identify her as one of their
own.
However, most troubling is Villarsf identification
of Evelina as his and not her father's.
Though she was
bequeathed to him, and he does have the power of her
guardianship, he still knows her identity and has the
documents to prove it.
Had he truly considered her his
own, would he not have given her his name?
Instead, he
gives her the anagram of Anville, not only an anagram of
her name, but another for " a villein."
Likewise, Mrs. Selwyn' s name implies that she had to
offer her
feminine side
in order
to win
society after the death of her husband.
does win.
a
place
in
In the end, she
Willoughby, Mirvan, and Lovel use Madame Duval
as proof of Evelina's lack of birthright, placing her low
on the marriage scale.
Burney uses Mrs. Selwyn, another
country gentlewoman, as the agent
happiness.
She
successfully
of Evelina's
solves
the
future
mystery
of
Evelinafs birth, confronting Sir John Belmont with the
truth
and
society.
bringing
Evelina
to
her
rightful
place
in
Barbara Zonitch aptly confirms that in order
for a woman to defend herself against the dominant male
culture without the help of a father, brother or lover,
she must be either a Mrs. Beaumont or a Mrs.
distinct opposites in a patriarchal society
Selwyn,
(51).
One
must either adopt the values dictated by upper class male
society or marginalize oneself by adopting upper class
male behavior as one's
own.
Through Mrs. Beaumont and
Mrs. Selwyn, Burney shows us the problematic outcome of
doing either.
Through Mrs. Mirvan and Madame Duval, we
are shown extremes, one sad, the other ludicrous.
Burneyfs final statement about Mrs. Selwyn lies in
the success Mrs. Selwyn has in uniting Evelina with her
father.
Mrs. Selwyn' s birth has little to do with her
virtue.
The same is true for Mr. Villars.
He lacks the
virtue necessary to carry out the duties he is charged
with for three generations of Evelyns.
Mrs. Selwynfs
marriage and subsequent inheritance puts her in position
to facilitate Evelina' s final journey to acceptance and
her
own
inheritance.
She,
unlike
Villars,
uses
her
position and power to act and speak and ultimately to
right wrongs.
The Inheritance of Evelina
Mr. Villars cannot guide Evelina to the discovery of
her rightful birth name.
nurse's
spent
switch
three
and
Mrs. Selwyn must discover the
rectify
generations
the mistake.
hiding
the
Villars
result
of
has
Evelyn
tragedies, and he cannot find it in himself to venture
from Berry Hill to save any one of them.
When we look
past Mr. Villars' first fiasco with John Evelyn, we must
confront his mishandling of Caroline Evelyn.
Several important questions must be asked about the
mother of Evelina.
First, there must be more than just
the burned certificate of marriage to verify the identity
of
Caroline
Evelyn.
Burney
passes
Caroline
out
of
existence when Belmont destroys the marriage certificate.
Susan
Greenfield
claiming
that
Evelina,
who
it
is
mentions
is
the
the
"rewritten"
embodiment
burned
certificate,
in
features
of
the
her
mother
of
(311).
Surely, Mr. Villars saw the resemblance and would know
that Sir John Belmont, confronted by this genetic replica
of his wife, would be compelled to accept her as his
daughter.
There
is another
document,
however,
hidden
away by Villars himself, and the letter is produced only
through the machinations of Mrs. Selwyn after Evelina's
first encounter with her father.
At the same time, Sir
John Belmont is in possession of a child he believes is
his true daughter.
The existence of a Belmont daughter is significant.
Because Belmont decided to raise his daughter,
rather
than give her over to Villars' charge, he determined not
to let Villars have another chance to fail.
he know that he has the wrong child.
does not tell him.
for Belmont's
Little does
Villars knows, but
Could Villars be seeking retribution
snubbing him?
If he is, then Villars'
silence, his distancing himself from Evelina and his lack
of
explanation
for
his
conscious act on his part.
order
to
punish
Belmont.
behavior
becomes
clearly
a
He hides the real Evelina in
He
knows
that
Belmont's
"daughter" should not be allowed to carry on his lineage,
no matter her inheritance, but he does nothing to prevent
it.
One common threat to dynasty that strict settlement
tried to mend was the quality of family line.
Those in
possession of wealth and power, bound by rules of strict
settlement and inheritance, had to worry about mistaken
identity and the possibility of bestowing their estates
on impostors.
For Burney, the possibility of mistaken
identity encompasses more than titles and estates.
For
her, mistaken identity and impostors bring into question
the purity
gentry.
of
and
quality of
the aristocracy
and
landed
Further, Burney's underlying questions of purity
heredity
should
have
given
pause
to
all
men
considering the purity of their own lines and the quality
of their inheritors.
Indeed, men of power, wealth and
title would be concerned with the quality of their own
blood.
Men
amounts
throughout
of
time
the
and
ages
effort
have
spent
ensuring
that
inordinate
offspring
produced by their legitimate wives is legitimate-theirs.
How difficult it is for a man to acquiesce to the truth
that the workings of female biology are out of sight and
therefore out of male control!
Therefore, one finds it
significant that Burney made John Evelynfs child female,
and her offspring female, as well.
inheritance
problems,
but
Not only are there
Burney
raises
legitimate
concerns about Villars' ability to manipulate the quality
of Sir John's bloodline.
Villars raises Caroline Evelyn,
secret marriage.
John Evelyn's
with her mother, Madame Duval.
the product
of a
daughter travels to live
Pressed by the obsequious
Duval into an arranged marriage,
one
that would make
Duvalfs estate larger, Caroline rashly agrees instead to
a clandestine marriage with Sir John Belmont.
Sir John,
a product of his time, is looking for the best match for
his estates and a match that will enhance his possessions
and his power.
the
When the match falls through, he burns
certificate
marriage.
and
leaves
The daughter of
his
wife,
denying
this marriage
their
becomes
our
heroine, while Sir John raises the nurse's daughter.
Had Evelina been a male, Sir John would have had a
much
easier
time
reclaiming
and
attaching
whatever
inheritance there could be to the Evelyn family name.
For, according to primogenitural law, a male child could
inherit directly, while in a family of daughters, the
inheritor would be a brother, or the husband of a sister
in line for the estate, though the line was through a
mother
Evelina
rather
than
presents
father.
female
Straub
experience
points
as
out
that
distinct
and
separable while still deferring to patriarchal authority
The
(1)
patriarchal
language
of
inheritance
is
so
pervasive that Evelina cannot resist, and the characters,
especially
our
heroine,
succumb
to
the
confusion
and
silence it causes.
Sir John reforms and remains in society.
so,
he
is privy
to
the
gossip
of
his
By doing
social
class,
including any gossip regarding his secret marriage and
the inevitable questions about the young daughter at his
side.
Even
after
protests,
however
slight,
by
Mr.
Villars, Sir John Belmont takes up his "daughter" and
lives his life, raising his alter-Evelina to the station
to which she was supposedly born.
yet
the
underlying
The irony is classic,
unlawfulness
of
the
situation,
considering the inheritance practice of the time and the
amounts of inheritance at stake within the novel have
been overlooked until now.
that
she knew her mother
Mrs.
and
Selwyn tells Evelina
that
she has
known the
unhappy story of Evelina's life for a long time.
If Mrs.
Selwyn, a "simple countrywoman," marginalized by society,
knows the story of Evelina, then surely there are others.
Not until she tells Evelina she knows does Evelina swear
her
to
secrecy
(351).
Even
Villars
admits
that
the
appearance of a daughter with Sir John will cause "all
who have heard it" to demand to know who the mother is
(373).
Evelina's
life is not as private, as secret, as
Villars has made it out to be.
Burney asks serious questions about the language of
inheritance, refusing to tailor her own language to gloss
over
the
ideology,
words.
contradictions
leaving
often
disturbing
implicit
rifts
in
in
the
cultural
fabric
of
Evelina is disrupted and disruptive at the same
time
(Straub 2-3).
Questions about
the will
of Mr.
Villars and the "will" he has for his charges confound
definitions and muddle the words that vie for centrality
in this novel.
Julia Epstein considers Evelina through
the broader concept of cultural context, arguing that
Burney's
fiction
analyzes
domestic
and
socioeconomic
power relations during an especially charged historical
period.
Epstein
asserts
that
Burney
dissects
the
economics of sexuality and argues for the authority of
narrative fiction to reframe social conditions through
representational discourse (Burney Criticism 281).
When we consider the fiction of the novel and its
representation of real life, we immediately see the irony
of life for Evelina Anville.
She inherits a fictional
life, however real it may be for her, only to be consumed
by the language of virtue that cloaks the infidelity of
husbands and fathers, then to be fictionalized once more
by the marriage-seeking males who equate her "marriageability"
with
misidentification
her
mistaken
disrupts
money
position.
eighteenth-century
belief in birth being equated with virtue.
gives us a sense of reality.
Her
society's
All
this
Truly, Burney's masterpiece
shows us that fiction sometimes makes a better reality
than
real
life.
Evelina
proves
the
pitfalls
of
inheritance,
proves
that
marriage
and
money
can
be
manipulated by personal agenda, and proves that life is
too unpredictable to guarantee the intended results of
strict legal settlement.
Chapter Four
Inheritance Language and
Unexpected Legacy in Pride and Prejudice
Property R i t e s :
Introduction
Jane Austenfs Pride and Prejudice gives a third view
of the effect of marriage and strict settlement practice
and its language on eighteenth-century novels.
Pride and
Prejudice portrays settlements seemingly improbable and
comic.
marriage
cases.
Austen targets the reality of inheritance and
settlements, not
all
of
which
were
textbook
Not all families followed the ideal standards
envisioned by the creators of strict settlement.
inheritances ran
smoothly.
The
story
of
the
Not all
Bennet
family, however, does give us all the characteristics of
an inheritance novel.
Austen
was
personally
problems in her family.
the workings of
involved
with
inheritance
She was familiar, not only with
strict settlement, but
also with
the
language of settlement practice, which she uses in her
work.
Her characters use the language of inheritance to
silence other characters.
Our heroine, Elizabeth, is the
center of judgment for Darcy, Collins, Wickham, and her
father
in
order
to
qualify
her
worthiness
name
and
title,
inheritances-Darcy' s
Longbourn, and Wickham's
than
perfect
debts.
settlement,
of
their
Collinsfs
Austen, using a less
emphasizes
Elizabethfs
worthiness to inherit for her father rather than from her
father.
As
Mr.
Bennet
slowly
loses
Longbourn,
he
Pemberley through his more than worthy daughter.
gains
Collins
may gain Longbourn, but the Bennets have social standing
by birth, which at the time was as important as land and
untouchable by men
like Collins.
Elizabeth at length
vindicates her immediate impressions of Wickham through
Darcy, finally reading him correctly through her maturity
and
good
judgment
and
language of inheritance,
ultimate
understanding
of
the
something poor Kitty lacks.
The famous opening line of the novel points to the
importance of inheritance:
"It
is a
truth universally
acknowledged,
that a single man in possession of a good
fortune, must
be
in want
of
a
wife"
(5).
The main
storyline follows the courtship of Fitzwilliam Darcy and
Elizabeth Bennet, as well as the courtship of her sister
Jane and Mr. Bingley.
In each case, a single man in
possession of a fortune bears out the truth of the first
line.
On a deeper note, however, the opening line also
describes
Bennet
the
and
courtship
the
and marriage
courtship
of
of Mr.
Charlotte
and Mrs.
Lucas
and
Mr.
Mr. Wickham, however, is a man who fervently
Collins.
wants to be mistaken for a man in possession of a good
fortune in order to marry into one.
The opening line does not say that a single man in
possession of a good fortune must be in want of a good
wife,
nor
does
it
tells
possession of that fortune.
us
that
a
good
man
is
in
Austen subtly supports the
eighteenth-century reality that strict settlement law may
have intended perfect marriages among the landed classes,
but sadly could not regulate the worthiness of those who
married or the offspring they produced.
Judith Newton
claims that Austen's
power and status of money:
access
to
autonomous,"
money
and
in
men
enjoy
the
"Male privilege
. . .
and
particular,
therefore
"the
makes
[men]
in
men
Pride
feel
and
Prejudice are conscious of having the power to choose and
they are fond of dwelling on it, of impressing it on
women" (65, 64).
True as Newtonfs statement is, Austen
also shows menfs powerlessness to predict or produce the
proper heirs to their money.
Darcy is in possession of a good fortune when he
meets Elizabeth Bennet.
have worked so far.
For him, the terms of settlement
The terms of his resettlement at
marriage still lie in the future.
Mr. Bingley's
fortune
and estate are the result of his fatherfs hard work.
is the first generation to inherit.
father's
sweat has
The power of his
given Bingley, Jr., access to the
habits and culture of the upper classes.
He, too, will
settle his estate in the future, at his marriage.
Darcy
and
settlements
Bingley,
work
He
inheritance
as
they
practice
were
For
and
marriage
intended.
More
specifically, Darcy and Bingley are honest men who have
come by their money and power honestly.
The opening line, therefore, signals the importance
of marriage settlements and inheritance practices, but
the three minor male characters, Mr. Bennet, Mr. Collins
and Mr. Wickham, are pivotal to the inheritance plot of
the novel.
Mr. Bennet is the most crucial of the three,
for it is his entail, the designated series of inheritors
that cannot be changed in any way, that sets the plot in
motion.
Eileen Spring tells us that
"
. . .
had it been
a simple entail, Mr Bennet could have brought it to an
end at any time.
That he could not do so is the starting
point for the story" (Law, Land and Family 33).
Personal Prejudice
Austen's
focus on the middle-class need for improved
status, as Ian Watt so aptly observed, was in part a
reflection of her own identification with the anomalies
of inheritance and the rules of settlement
(298).
Her
family situation gave her a heightened awareness of the
differences between the lots of genteel women and those
of genteel men.
Newton reminds us that Austen had five
brothers who had "access to work that paid, access to the
status
(60).
her
that
belong[ed]
to being
prosperous
and
male"
Although Austen treated her situation and that of
brothers
with
"amused
Newton calls Austen's
and
uncomplaining
comment,"
reaction a "telling emphasis" on
the difference between the economic restrictions placed
on
women
and
economic
privileges
accorded
to men,
a
reaction implied in her letters, but which she does not
articulate (61).
Austen, then, was acutely aware of the
inequities of life for women; and, with five brothers,
she
was
intimately
aware
of
marriage
practice
settlement practice as they chose their wives.
and
Austen
may not have articulated her awareness in her letters or
in her novels, but her reflections in her novels, like in
her
letters,
depict
an
attitude
of
"amused
and
uncomplaining comment."
Austen brings an awareness of and experience with
inheritance
practice
and
Clarissa and Evelina.
its
language
different
Vivien Jones points out
from
Austen' s
alertness "to the complexities and insecurities of her
own social constituency" of rural England at a time when
estates
were
being
bought,
rented
or
created
by
the
rising merchant class (Introduction xxxiii).
Pride and Prejudice is an excellent representation
of inheritance practice and language because of the legal
aberrations that it presents.
the
texture
reiterates
of
"the
the
language
values
of
Ivor Morris observes that
within
commerce
Austen's
and
novels
property,
counting houses and the inherited estate" (51).
the
However,
legal aberrations define the situations of Mr. Bennet,
Mr. Collins, and Mr. Wickham and show Austen' s awareness
that the power of inheritance and patronage stems from.
She places characters in predicaments of inheritance the
law could not foresee.
Critics
Austen's
hand
place
great
emphasis
on
the
women
of
novels and the treatment they receive at the
of
males
through
inheritance
and
patronage.
However, the males of her novels, such as Mr. Bennet,
Collins,
they
and Wickham,
are
also
pawns
become
in
the
intriguing
characters
settlement
game.
as
Their
language, their actions, and their futures depend on how
inheritance practice touches them.
Just as the Bennet women, like many women of the
time,
lived
out
their
lives
according
to
whatever
accustomed pattern of privilege had been bestowed upon
them, these particular men must come to terms with events
they never considered would visit their lives.
deal
with
their
inheritance
circumstances
How they
sheds
new
light on both Pride and Prejudice and on the power of
inheritance
eighteenth
practice
century.
and
language
Rachel
over
Trickett
men
in
believes
the
Austen
realistically portrays the social and financial status of
each of her characters in order to situate them among the
same
class
of
which
she
was
a
member,
a
"section
expanding from the landed gentry down to the professional
families
in
the
fortunes in trade"
mercantile
(297).
rich
who
had
made
their
Trickett continues, pointing
out that Austen "locates every character of importance
according to his or her status, social and financial,"
including her titled characters (298).
Class distinction was part of Austen's personal life
as much as of her charactersf lives.
Her characters
often demonstrate that title does not always signal worth
or good character.
Bourgh
and
backgrounds;
Sir
For instance, Trickett notes Lady de
William
Lucas
and while both
are
of
very
are comic characters, Sir
William is affectionately portrayed
(298).
ups
Copeland
and
trade-downs,"
as
different
Edward
The "tradecalls
the
marriage scenarios in the novel, are made in "values" and
worth in order to "put to the side or mitigate, the harsh
economic system
. . .
which runs ninety percent of the
novelfs actions" (43).
The "harshness" of the economic system, however, is
a
product
more
of
settlement practice
The novel's
marriage
than
settlements
of mundane
and
strict
economic matters.
circumstances are specific to marriage and
inheritance practice regulated by specific procedures put
in place to preserve the power and wealth of the landed
gentry and nobility.
Specifically the entail puts in
place a line of male heirs to an estate that cannot be
changed.
Mr. Bennet loses his estate to an entail, and
Mr. Wickham learns very early that blood not love, family
not favoritism, ultimately decide who will inherit the
estate.
with
He, Mr. Bennet learn that the "harshness" comes
the application
of these rigid
cases not foreseen by the law itself.
laws
in singular
The realism Austen
lends to her characters' social and financial situations,
then,
continues
through
her
portrayal
situations regarding inheritance and
practice.
Austen's
own
family
of
their
strict
felt
the
legal
settlement
"harshness"
firsthand.
Just after the publication of Pride and Prejudice,
Austen's mother nearly lost the family cottage at Chawton
through the imposition of an entail.
A
relative had
adopted Austen's brother, Edward Knight, the inheritor of
the estate at Chawton.
A settlement will placed on the
estate nearly a hundred years earlier had put an entail
on it.
Inheritors were to follow one family line; if
that line were to end, the entail would then follow the
Hinton family line.
When Edward Knight was in a position
to inherit, a Hinton nephew disputed the inheritance,
contending
that
dissolved,
and
since he
was
the
that
not
entail
had
adoption
truly of
never
negated
the
family
been
legally
Edward's
claim,
line.
Edward
countered that there had been errors made in the deed of
suspending entailment and the entail was invalid because
it
had
been
executed
outside
its
legal
term
limit.
Knight won the case, but Mrs. Austen was left alarmed by
the real possibility that she could have lost her cottage
and her home had her son not won the suit
(Nokes 4 3 8 -
Strict settlement affected Austen' s life personally,
as it did the lives of those around her, especially the
women.
They were touched often by the "harshness" of the
economic
circumstances
settlements
and
strict
characters reflect the
practice and marriage
These
same
that
settlement.
from
constant disruption
however,
marriage
Austen' s
often
female
inheritance
settlements could make
practices,
characters, as well.
developed
in life.
disrupt
male
Both Austen and her characters were
always aware of the precariousness of their situations,
and they were caught by the power settlement practices
had over their lives.
Inheritance practice and its language disrupt not
only the lives of nearly every character in Pride and
Prejudice,
silencing
but
some
also
and
their
ability
emboldening
to
communicate,
others.
Inheritance
practice becomes part of the motivation for the pride and
the prejudice
in those who
either have
or
have
not,
driving
Austen' s
characters
and
working
its
power
throughout the plot.
Daughters and Discourse
Mr. Bennet is in possession of a good fortune and an
estate before he marries. He has every reason to believe
his
future
Bennets,
is
Mr.
secure.
Collins,
Connected
future
by
family
possessor
of
to
the
Longbourn
through the entail, has no fortune or estate as the novel
opens,
though
possession.
he
is
looking
forward
to
his
future
Looking for a connection to any upper class
family of means, and feeling he has good reason because
of his
childhood connection
to the
Darcy
family, Mr.
Wickham finally connects himself with the Bennet family
for want of his own fortune or estate.
All three gentlemen are influenced by the language
and
power
of
inheritance,
but
they
react
situations and use that influence differently.
the most
telling
effect of
strict settlement
to
their
Perhaps
is that
Longbourn, the Bennet family home where the Bennets have
been "long born," will pass from Mr. Bennet, born and
bred to care for the estate, will lose not only the land,
but the family name on the land.
His successor, Mr.
Collins is "low" born, someone without property,
and
certainly not bred to be the keeper of an estate, while
Wickham, also low born, but more importantly, ill bred,
mistakenly weasels his way into the Bennet family, only
to
find
he
property,
novel.
marries
therefore,
into
the
becomes
entail
the
fallout.
centerpiece
The
of
the
Longbourn is rarely spoken of directly, but it
remains the silent constant, representing the backbone of
upper class English society, and the ultimate objective
of strict settlement practice.
Mona Scheuermann points out, "It is impossible to
speak of
falling in love, courtship, and marriage
in
Pride and Prejudice without speaking of property" (201).
If we focus on the marriages of our three minor males
characters rather
than on the marriages
of
Bingley,
also
property
then
we
say
that
it
is
Darcy and
that
becomes the impetus for falling in love, courtship and
marriage.
The women Bennet, Collins and Wickham marry
seem incidental when it comes to love and courtship; they
seem more for money and show though they have little of
each, Austen believing as much in marriage for money as
in marriage
for
love
(McMaster 290).
Further,
with
Wickham, one could even say that spite plays a part in
some marriages.
Overtones
marriage
are
settlements,
of
the
pecuniary
always present
giving
the
plight
in the
reader
a
of
terms
"grim
women
of marriage
picture,
perhaps statistically not a wildly inaccurate one
(McMaster 291) .
in
but
. . .
/I
The central issue of a womanfs marriage
clearly is "[tlhe amount of ready capital that a woman
possesses as her marriage portion [and] is the motor that
runs
the
economic
(Copeland 35) .
plot
of
Successful
[Pride
and
characters
Prejudice]"
in
Pride
and
Prejudice do not become so through their own actions, but
through the language and power of strict settlement and
inheritance,
and
not
only
successful.
Male
and
female
female
characters
characters
alike
are
spiral
upward into the higher fringes of the landed gentry and
aristocracy, which
class
dream
situations
is the eighteenth-century merchant-
though
that
quirky
strict
and
often
settlement
laughable,
puts
them
with
into.
Austen' s men are often dismissed as shallow caricatures;
however,
their
attributed
to
personalities
the
actions
dispensation
women through strict settlement.
of
can
be
partly
estates, money
Austen's
and
subtle irony
regarding the effect of inheritance often is found in her
characters.
Juliet McMaster rightly asserts that Lady Catherine
de Bourgh's
cradle arrangement for the marriage of her
sickly daughter to the vibrant son of her sister in order
to fulfill the
family's
dynastic ambition was botched
because Austen felt that an infusion of new blood into
the family would be a very healthy move
Bourgh's
given
Miss de
(292).
sickliness implies inbreeding, an event common
the
relatively
small
number
of
aristocratic
families, and one which could be erased through marriage
of
the aristocracy with
the upwardly mobile
and very
wealthy merchant and professional classes.
Mr.
mobile.
Bennet
represents
the
best
of
the
upwardly
He is a wealthy landowner who is the son of a
wealthy landowner.
The Bennet family has been able to
pass down its estate through strict settlement practice
for at least two generations thanks to prescient planning
and good husbandry of the land.
does
not
ascend
to
Mr. Bennet, however,
marriage;
rather,
he
moves
collaterally, marrying the daughter of a professional who
will
bring
four
thousand
pounds
to
their
Little did he know what the future would hold.
marriage.
All the
prudent planning and care taking would prove useless.
Until recently, critics have felt that Mr. Bennet
was
remiss
with
his
family.
There
is
a
lingering
tendency to believe he could have done something about
the entail.
Edward Copeland sees Mr. Bennet as "grossly
irresponsible" to his wife and five daughters, allowing
his family situation to be such as it is at the beginning
of the novel (38).
Judith Newton says that Mr. Bennet's
imprudence accounts for his unhappy
family life
(67).
Alistair Duckworth contends that Mr. Bennet is socially
derelict, "less than responsible," and a man who "refuses
to
adopt
the
role
of
father
and
landowner"
(128).
Elizabeth Langland believes that Mr. Bennet forgoes his
parental
responsibilities
individual pleasure (32).
for
Mr.
Bennet.
in
order
to
satisfy
his
That is how it generally goes
However,
personal
shortcomings
notwithstanding, one does have to appreciate his dilemma.
Mr.
Bennet
has
five
daughters
and
no
son.
Most
importantly, however, as Eileen Spring has pointed out,
Mr. Bennet could do nothing to break the entail, since
laws forbid it (Law, Land and Family 33) .
Mr. Bennet did the appropriate thing with his estate
when he married.
had
The succession of sons in his family
continued for at least two generations.
He felt
secure in his option to resettle the estate with
entail intact.
son, Mr.
Anticipating
the
the arrival of his first
Bennet also assumed economy to be "perfectly
useless" when he made his marriage settlement.
Reaching
majority, his eldest son would join with him and resettle
the entail or cut it off, if necessary
(249).
Austen
tells us that despair set in, and it was "too late to be
saving" (249).
We are told that Mr. Bennet often wished
that he had "done his duty" in laying by an annual sum
for his wife and family, especially when Lydia's
honor
would need to be purchased, and he would have to turn to
others
for
the
money
(249).
Mrs.
Bennet
had
four
thousand pounds of her own, but she also had "no turn for
economy," and only her husbandfs "love of independence"
prevented them from exceeding their income (249). He held
her four thousand, made interest on it, but did not touch
it out of prudent respect for the integrity of his estate
and freedom from debt.
He does not consider that money
even for restoration of Lydiafs honor.
The entail was an
error of his money and his estate and became an error of
choice only when his wife could not produce a male heir.
Over the ensuing years, Mr. Bennet exhibits moral
anguish for signing his familyfs future away and finding
himself
powerless
to
rectify
it.
The
entail
weighs
heavily on his mind, but for him, talk is useless.
None
near him is familiar with his position, so he rises to
the
level
of
his
upbringing,
bearing
his
error
with
dignity, irony, silence.
The Bennet name will end; the
legacy of his father and his family will be handed to a
stranger. The Bennet women cannot fathom the devastation
visited upon the family name, as women lose patronyms
when
they
marry,
taking
up
the
last
name
of
their
husband, rarely finding identity in male-oriented labels.
Mr. Bennet is silent and detached from his family
and
responsibilities
to
them,
not
because
it
is
his
nature, but because his estate, his future, no longer
demand his input.
In other areas of his life, he is a
vital and vigorous man.
He talks of the farm and the
need for the horses in the field, and he is certainly on
good terms with his neighbors, both high and low.
the first to visit Mr.
Bingley,
He is
knowing that his own
position is one of high social standing in his village.
Mr. Bennet was, at one time, much like Fitzwilliam
Darcy, a wealthy young man, though not titled and with a
palpable difference in wealth; but, still he was a man of
pride
and
intelligence, worthy
to
inherit
the
estate and the responsibilities that go with it.
however, Mr.
Collins will
family
Now,
inherit Longbourn, and only
five thousand pounds will go to his wife and daughters.
All of this, along with his unfortunate choice of wife,
combines
to make
Mr.
Bennet
a
silent,
sardonic man:
"Respect, esteem, and confidence, had vanished for ever;
and all his views of domestic happiness were overthrown"
(194).
Mr.
Bennet
is
silent
because
of
a
prodigious
production of girl babies coupled with the omnipresent
entail,
an
families
ominous
in the
combination,
seventeenth and
encountered
eighteenth
by
real
centuries.
Randolph Trumbach tells us that land normally went to the
eldest
son
and
then
relative," and when
to
the
"oldest
male
patrilineal
the settlement was made,
"younger
children were usually given money when the land went to
the eldest son" (41).
Longbourn, Mr. Bennet' s land, his
realty, his real worth, would no longer carry his name or
be passed to his direct heirs, while his personalty, his
money, provided
for the rest of his family.
Through
strict settlement his land is out of his control, and
through his will, his money, like his wife's
spending,
seems out of his control.
Trumbach
reminds
us
that
a
settlement's
most
important business was to balance the claims of family
continuity and greatness against a satisfactory provision
for younger children and wives (70). Inherent in this is
the presence of an eldest male.
Mr.
Bennet, at
the
beginning of his marriage, was looking out for his future
family through provision for his male line through his
son.
Years
later, without
that
son,
there would
nothing left of the Bennet name when he died.
be
For Mr.
Bennet, Mrs. Bennet was a large part of his inheritance
problem.
She and her family were responsible for more
than just the birth of five girls.
Their part in his
downfall goes much deeper.
Members
of
father-in-law
settlement.
a
husband's
included,
family,
negotiated
his
father
the
and
marriage
Sometimes even the input of the future wife
was included.
If the future husband received estates
from his future wife or her family, he could not sell
them; thus, his economic power could be severely limited.
Resettlement of his estate upon marriage would legally
affix
those
lands
and
the
marriage
portion
his
wife
brought with her became his to use until his death.
the marriage
At
settlement, well before the birth of any
children, the wife and any future children's inheritances
were fixed.
Trumbach observes that daughters received monetary
inheritances,
but
they
usually
were
not
allowed
to
inherit land.
If there was no male heir at the death of
the father, then larger portions were given to daughters
and
the
land went
to
an
uncle
or male
cousin
(70).
George Brodrick notes that scarcely a wealthy family of
considerable
antiquity
remained
whose
estate
had
not
experienced descent to an heir or coparceners (daughters
who inherited land equally) because of strict settlement.
Brodrick reasons that this situation was usually caused
by
a
family not
retaining the
advice
of
a
solicitor
accustomed to dispensing marriage settlement ( 9 4 ) .
Mrs. Bennet's
daughter,
then,
father was a lawyer in Meryton.
was
"marrying
up,"
as
inherited Longbourn and had an income.
Mr.
Mrs.
His
Bennet
Bennet's
brother was a successful businessman, and her sister was
married to her father's former law clerk.
Had there been
a foreseeable problem with the settlement, Mrs. Bennet's
father should certainly have been able to handle it.
would
have
been
part
of
settlement on his daughter's
the
negotiations
for
He
the
behalf, and he most likely
was involved in the marriage settlements for his son, as
well.
Mrs.
profession.
Bennet's
father
was
in
a
middle-class
He made money and did not need to worry
about his children or their futures, for the money and
connections to make them happy and/or to help them marry
well were readily available; after all, beauty and four
thousand pounds was enough to make Mr. Bennet settle his
marriage.
He looked forward to raising his family.
What man foresees only daughters?
As we meet Mr.
Bennet, we know he wishes with blinding hindsight that he
had either resettled his estate in fee simple (taken off
the
entail)
in
conjunction
with
his
father
when
he
married, or that he had laid by an annual sum rather than
spend his whole income (249).
was not unshared.
His deprecation of himself
Even his favorite daughter Elizabeth
had a difficult time forgiving him.
She had never been
"so fully aware of the evils arising from so ill-judged a
direction of talents; talents which rightly used, might
at
least
have
preserved
the
respectability
of
his
daughters" (194).
Elizabeth cannot excuse what she considers to be an
oversight by her father, but she also cannot understand
the pressures of settlement he was dealing with when he
married,
and
giving in.
to
which
he
now
so
desperately
regrets
Habbakuk sheds light on Mr. Bennet' s guilt,
observing that when "the eldest son in a landed family
entered into a new settlement by which his own interest
was-like
that
of
his
father
and
grandfather
before
h i w l i m i t e d to that of life tenant," he was allowing the
estate to be "entailed in turn to the eldest son"
(2).
Willing one's
estate to an unborn
son was the normal
procedure for an upper class landed family.
Mr. Bennet
was not doing anything out of the ordinary in settling
his estate as he did at his marriage.
Mr. Bennet did have a choice at marriage to break
the
entail
eldest
son
or
resettle.
in
a
resettlement:
"
Habbakuk
family
. . .
could
when
his
explains
choose
to
that
join
the
in
a
father died he would
succeed as tenant in tail and become absolute owner,"
though Habbakuk insists these cases were rare (2).
Mr.
Bennet could not have foreseen there would be no son in
his future, so he went the way of most
marriage
and
father.
Such were his hopes when he was "captivated by
youth and
resettled
beauty,
and
his
that
estate
in
young men at
with
appearance of good
which youth and beauty generally give
married a pretty girl who brought
estate.
tail
. . ."
his
humor,
(194).
He
4000 pounds to his
Unfortunately, not only did Mrs. Bennet not give
him a son, but she turned out to be less than Mr. Bennet
expected, and her fortune less than necessary for the
future .
For
Mr.
Bennet,
foolish," with a
mind" (194).
Mrs.
Bennet
is
"ignorant
and
"weak understanding and an illiberal
Witty repartee and appreciative respect for
her husband's
are missing
considerable intelligence and common sense
from her make-up.
Mrs. Bennet's
lack of
economy was not a problem at first, for Mr. Bennet was
sure of having a son.
the
years
slipped
Mrs. Bennet gave him no boys.
past,
Mr.
Bennet's
good
humor
As
and
optimism waned, slowly replaced by a sardonic, fatalistic
attitude.
Strict settlement got the better of him, and its
power to silence and disrupt communication overtook him.
Mr. Bennet no longer engaged in meaningful communication
with his family, except with Elizabeth, as it held no
value
for him.
He had
five daughters, a spendthrift
wife, and a rock-solid entail.
home to commiserate with him.
his problem.
There was no one in his
His wife was oblivious to
Mr. Bennet knew that the "experience of
three and twenty years had been insufficient to make his
wife understand his character" (8).
Mrs.
entail:
Bennet
"Jane
could not
and
nature of an entail.
Elizabeth
fathom the details
attempted
to
of
the
explain
the
They had often attempted it before,
but it was a subject on which Mrs. Bennet was beyond the
reach of reason
. . ."
(54).
Mr. Bennet had no comfort
from his wife regarding the entail.
understand
its
meaning.
She
Indeed, she did not
was
not
capable
of
understanding it or the language it was written in.
She
blames Mr. Bennet, saying, "How any one could have the
conscience
to
entail
away
an
estate
. . ."
daughters, I cannot understand
from
one's
(109).
own
When Mr.
Bennet announces that Mr. Collins, the future inheritor
of Longbourn, is coming to dinner, Mrs. Bennet complains
that "it [is] the hardest thing in the world, that your
estate should be entailed away from your children; and I
am sure if I had been you, I should have tried to do
something about it"
This one seemingly sensible
(54).
statement regarding the adverse power of an entail also
reflects her lack of sensitivity and understanding.
Mr. Bennet's
wife
talking
despair deepens as he listens to his
about
Charlotte Lucas:
their income.
the match
between Mr.
"They will
Collins
and
take care not to outrun
They will never be distressed for money.
Well, much good may it do them!
And so, I suppose they
often talk of having Longbourn when your father is dead"
(187).
her
Considering the emphasis she may have placed on
words,
husband
one
for
can
his
read
Mrs.
"lack
inevitability of his death.
incapable
of
acknowledging
of
Bennet
as
economy"
blaming
and
for
her
the
At the same time, she is
her
role
economy" in the Bennet household.
in
the
"lack
of
Her words belie her
inability
to
comprehend
inheritance
and
settlement
language.
The more she talks, the less she says, and the
more she silences her husband.
Mr. Bennet's
conduct may be reprehensible in Mrs.
Bennet' s and many readersf eyes, but much of his demeanor
and action comes from the entail.
of his marriage settlement.
His life is a product
In Meryton, Mr. Bennet is
alone in having inherited an estate.
secluded in his study.
He spends his days
He is in command of the language
of inheritance, but he is unable to use it.
David Nokes
writes that Pride and Prejudice is a novel "in which one
character misapprehends the character of another, on the
basis of false first impressions"
(432).
rapport
Bennet
with
Elizabeth,
Mr.
Despite his
has
been
"misapprehended" by Mrs. Bennet and his five daughters
because
the
impossible
to
language
create
of
inheritance
the
proper
has
first
or
made
it
lasting
impression.
Austen tells us Mr. Bennet misses Elizabeth after
her marriage to Darcy, and his affection for her "drew
him oftener from home than any thing else could do; he
delighted in going to Pemberley" (310).
Mr. Bennet knows
that Darcy speaks his language, and he is unique among
the characters in his life to understand his position.
T h e Wrong Man i n the Right Place
Mr. Collins takes the place of the son Mr. Bennet
never had.
Austen
He will inherit Longbourn.
shows
the
full
irony
of
In Mr. Collins,
strict
settlement.
Without a Bennet male heir, Longbourn, long held by the
Bennet
family, and therefore, the landed gentry, will
pass to the son of an "illegitimate and miserly man," the
complete opposite of Mr. Bennet.
Mr. Bennet was the beneficiary and victim of strict
settlement.
Mr. Collins fell into his inheritance and
living
by
what
prosperity"
(61).
Austen
describes
as
The greater affront
"unexpected
to Mr.
Bennet
comes when Mr. Collins seeks to marry one of the Bennet
girls in order to "assure [Mr. Bennet] of my readiness to
make them every possible amends
. . ."
(55).
Ivor Morris
observes that marrying into the family will have little
effect on Mr. Collins's standing.
social
standing
himself,
he
Unfazed and "without
displays
undiscriminating
respect for degree and those who possess it" (56).
Mr.
Collins was not born a gentleman, so neither Longbourn
nor his living will be able to raise his intrinsic value.
His birth will always betray him.
His "undiscriminating
respect" will always betray his lack of breeding to just
those he wishes to impress.
His father, who could be as close to Mr. Bennet as a
brother-in-law,
could be
stature to Mr. Bennet.
relatively close in rank and
Mrs. Bennet speaks of hating such
"false friends," while Mr. Bennet finds Collins to have
"some filial scruples," indicating there is a legitimate
relationship between the two men
distant
relatives,
separated
(55).
widely
by
Had they been
marriage,
Mr.
Bennet would have little reason to know Collins's father
at all.
However, they were close enough to have argued
and to have resolved never to see each other or speak to
each other again.
Collins knew of the rift between his
father and Mr. Bennet, which he admits he "frequently
wished to heal
. .
fearing
memory"
Collins's
(55).
. . .
lest
but for some time I was kept back
it might
Mr.
Bennet
seem disrespectful
had
never
seen
to
the
.
his
elder
son, but he knew upon receipt of his letter
that the future inheritor of his estate was aware of the
entail and aware that Mr. Bennet had only daughters.
Mr.
Bennet and the elder Mr. Collins had been intimate on
some footing in order for both Collins men to be aware of
their eligibility in the entail, and therefore, they had
to be closely related to Mr. Bennet.
Mr. Bennet, as the only or eldest son, came away
with the Bennet estate.
Had Mr. Collins, Sr., been a
younger half-brother or cousin, then he may have felt the
effects
of
primogeniture.
A
younger
child
feeling
cheated because of primogeniture and strict settlement
was common.
An eldest or only son who became secondary
through a second marriage was also common.
us
that
"landowners
. . .
knew within
Spring tells
fairly narrow
bounds what was the correct division of property between
eldest son and younger children.
They never had serious
doubt that the bulk of the estate should go to the eldest
son" (Law, Land and Family 87) .
Mr. Collins, Sr., would
have assumed the restricted position of a younger son or
step-son coupled with a restricted ability to marry well.
The elder Collins and Mr. Bennet may both have felt
they were punished by strict settlement, especially Mr.
Bennet with his entail, but Mr. Collins, Jr., as Mrs.
Bennet observes, exults in it
(56).
The irony in the
portrayal is that strict settlement practice not only had
the power to subvert the Bennet family's existence, but
it also adversely affected the inheritor.
Rather than
throwing Collins into a higher standard of living and a
more
expansive manner
befitting
his
new
station,
the
knowledge and power of his future inheritance served only
to heighten his bad qualities and his insipid kowtowing
to his betters.
Collinsfs
good
does have some-are
qualities-and
Austen
tells
us
he
silenced in lieu of his praise of and
unctuous behavior to those he feels deserve his notice.
That he seeks to make one of the Bennet girls his wife in
order to smooth over "bad feelings" is bad enough, but he
outdoes himself
in going
Morris
that
remarks
baseness,
as
he
from one
Collins
feels a
sister
to another.
cannot
fathom
superficial
desire
his
own
to marry
Elizabeth in order to "improve the lot of the Bennet
daughters upon his inheriting the estate" (34).
So overwhelmed is Mr. Collins with his prospects for
the
future
that
he
not
only
cannot
understand
why
Elizabeth would turn him down, but he feels obligated to
lecture her on the very real possibility that no one else
will ask for her hand considering the smallness of her
dowry.
all
Like many other critics, Morris points out that
Austen
novels
couple marriage
with
aspect of eighteenth-century finance:
for
it
and
the
satisfactions
of
the mercenary
"Money-the
possessing
need
it-"
dominates the musings of her heroines, and there is "a
universal assumption that knowing a man implies knowing
his bank balance" (34-35).
The character of Mr. Collins takes this argument to
another level, suggesting that a woman's
man's
knowledge of a
worth is a natural response to a man's
woman's
knowing a
worth as she enters the marriage market.
It
implies that what a woman brings to a marriage
is as
important as the wealth of a prospective husband.
Rumor
and
speculation
haunt
both
parties
as
they
negotiate
marriage, since true monetary worth is private and often
changeable with the vicissitudes of business.
The only
public acknowledgement of worth comes with the offer of a
marriage
settlement, and only then are the negotiated
amounts made public and provable.
Collins bombards Mr. Bennet with letters of thanks
and apology and offers not to mention Elizabeth's lack of
fortune if she were to marry him.
better
qualified
than
Elizabeth
He even boasts he is
to
decide
the
social
niceties upper-class life deserves through his education
and study.
The challenge of modern interpretation and knowledge
of the power of strict settlement and its language comes
in the perspective each man brings to Longbourn.
For Mr.
Bennet, Longbourn is the culmination of generations and
the symbol of the Bennet dynasty, its intrinsic value,
forgoing all else.
For Mr. Collins, Longbourn presents
an extrinsic value, something he knows about from his
youth, yet never thinks of "rising" to, something far
beyond the reach of his birth, breeding and dreaming, yet
his because of the accident of birth.
In the eyes of
landed
piece
gentry,
Longbourn
tenanted by a man
is
a
small
of little money but
of
land
long heritage.
After Mr. Bennet' s death, the land will be a small piece
of land tenanted by a man with little money and less
breeding.
More
appalling
for
the
Bennet
family
is
the
subsequent marriage of Mr. Collins to Charlotte Lucas.
Charlotte's father has a title, one he received as a gift
from the king while Sir William was mayor of Meryton.
Just as with Collins, Sir Lucas gains his family line,
estate or inheritance earned through good fortune rather
than
through
strict
settlement
law.
contributed, however, to Sir William's
The
title
decision to quit
his business and remove to Lucas Lodge to "occupy himself
solely in being
civil to all the world.
For though
elated with his rank, it did not render him supercilious"
(18).
Austen's
two-fold.
ironic pairing
of Collins with
Lucas
is
Charlotte has no dowry or portion and little
hope of marrying well, though her father has a title and
assumes the lifestyle of the landed gentry.
Her future
husband falls into an estate and a good living by being
in the right place and the right time, not through merit
or title.
His good fortune does not work in his favor as
does the accident of title on Sir William, for Collins
becomes even more
inheritance.
supercilious than he was before his
Charlotte, without a voice or future, turns
to Collins for comfort and security, knowing the social
consequences for herself and her family.
Mr.
Bennet reflects privately on the marriage
of
Charlotte Lucas, consoling himself that the young woman
whom he used to consider sensible, "was as foolish as his
wife, and more foolish than his daughter"
Bennet,
however,
remarks
(107).
Charlotte's
that
Jane
marrying
Collins is a "most eligible match," since Charlotte is
the oldest daughter in a large family without much of a
portion
does-that
(115).
the
Elizabeth
Bennet
fails
daughters
are
to
see
in much
what
the
Jane
same
position.
Inheritance practice and its language bring out the
worst in Collins.
Ivor Morris declares that Collins's
"name has become a byword
own-a
for a silliness all of his
felicitous blend of complacent self-approval and
ceremonious servility" (1).
originally
filled
with
Austen describes Collins as
humility,
but
his
consequent
feelings of "early and unexpected prosperity" made him
"altogether
a
mixture
of
pride
and
humility"
(61).
Unlike Sir Lucas or Mr. Bingley, who have risen to the
occasion of their worth, Collins only sinks further into
the baser qualities that make up the greatest portion of
his personality.
Morris says it best regarding Collins,
calling hi, "the living expression and microcosm of all
those things against which [Austen] must in her personal
life
come
inheritance
to
and
terms"
his
(160).
living
The
consume
language
Collins.
of
his
He
is
incapable of speaking without making mention of either.
His
communication
is
so
severely
disrupted
by
his
inheritance that he becomes an ugly personification of
what he cannot articulate.
At
the
same time, Austen makes
womanfs job is to marry well.
it
clear
that
a
Charlottefs marriage to
Collins shows that Austen understood there were ups and
downs in the marriage market, and not all young women
were endowed with enough talent, beauty, charm or portion
to make an excellent match.
Many women like Charlotte
Lucas would
discomfort
waiting
marry
of
not
for comfort rather
marrying
for Kitty and Mary
at
all,
Bennet.
than
a
suffer
potential
the
fate
Charlotte quietly
accepts the faults of her new husband, and Austen takes
particular care to show her comfortable in her marriage
rather
than mercenary
and
miserable
207).
Like her husband, Charlotte is in the market to
marry, not to find love.
(Scheuermann 200,
Security, status, and class
drive these two people together.
Inheritance and entails
make up the language of courtship for Collins, as he
first pursues the daughters of the estate he is going to
receive, then settles on the daughter of the only titled
man in Meryton.
social position
Bennet
in their
Bennets .
long before he met
draws
presentiments
wife
Collins was aware of his new legal and
out
the Bennets.
Collinsfs
self-aggrandizing
regarding his future position
first conversation
As Collins goes
Bourghfs
daughter,
Collins's
interest
the
and future
after dinner
at
the
on about Lady Catherine de
reader
in her
Mr.
and
Mr.
Bennet
as a possible
sense
future wife.
Bennet asks him "whether these pleasing attentions
[to
Miss de Bourghl proceed from the impulse of the moment,
or are the result of previous
replies that he wishes
study?"
"to give
['such
(59). Collins
little elegant
complimentsf] as unstudied an air as possible," though he
admits to enjoying the work of putting them together(59).
Collins by nature is driven by his place in the strict
settlement system, and he spends a great deal of time
devising
"compliments"
that
will
help
further.
He cannot have the daughter of Lady Catherine
de Bourgh, but he has flattered both.
his
position
He moves to the
Bennet sisters, then on to Charlotte Lucas.
The slow
descent down the social ladder is not haphazard; Collins
starts at the top and works down systematically.
reaction
Austen
of
the women
humor:
on all
Lady Catherine
three
rungs
de Bourgh
is
The
typical
doesnft
even
register the thought of Collins marrying her daughter,
telling Collins he should find a wife soon; Elizabeth and
Jane are amused and disgusted; Charlotte is flattered and
relieved finally to find a comfortable future.
settlement starts him down the ladder of
Collins's
success.
Mr. Wickham's World
Evelinafs Mr. Villars has a name that alerts the
reader
to
several
through his name.
of
a
villain,
possible
character
traits
heralded
Mr. Villars may not have the character
but
he
does
have
the
character
of
a
villein.
Pride
and
presents a possible
Prejudice's
George
Wickham
also
character trait through his name.
The reader comes to realize that George Wickham is surely
as wicked as his name suggests.
He uses false pretenses
and a story of denied inheritance to gain access to the
upper
regions
of
society.
His
deceit
and
treachery
nearly ruin every woman he sets his greed on.
Young
aristocrats
were
out
to
find
wives
with
fortunes and estates in order to improve their own lot,
but there were also those who pretended to have a fortune
in order to marry a fortune.
Claudia Johnson notes that
"for [Austen's] male characters, dependence on the wishes
or
the
purses
necessity,
Wickham's
of
others,
is
never
life
and
wealthy wife.
if
sometimes
admirable
energy
. . ."
are
exonerated
(85).
devoted
to
as
George
finding
a
He builds a past out of partial truths and
turns his less than stellar youth into a moral cause.
Tara
Wallace
Wickham,
observes
including
that
Darcy' s,
the
silences
Elizabethfs,
surrounding
and
Jane' s,
allow George Wickham to "invent a self and a history as
attractive as his features," keeping him free to "safely
contract more debts and seduce more women" (49).
Wickham counts on the discretion of others to mark
his own silence regarding the truth.
Elizabeth is taken
with him from the moment she sees him.
Quick and bright,
she is attracted to him immediately, taken by his looks
and his conversation.
correct
and
Elizabeth
Austen describes him as "perfectly
unassuming"
and
begins
his
(63).
play
Wickham
for
perhaps even her hand in marriage.
her
settles
feelings
on
and
He begins with his
past and his relationship with Darcy.
What Wickham does not say about Darcy or himself is
pivotal to his gaining position in the upper middle class
and the military.
the
extrinsic
Wickham, like Collins, is taken with
value
of
Longbourn,
reasoning
inherited property means prosperity and wealth.
that
Access
into Elizabeth's good graces depends on him telling his
side of the Darcy legend and keeping Darcyfs side quiet.
Access to Lydia will depend on Lydia's silence as well as
the silence of those around her.
In this way, Wickham
tells no real lie, but neither does he tell the real
truth.
As
Tara
Prejudice
Wickham's
absence
Wallace
are
never
silence,
of
settings.
suggests,
silences
accidental
like
self-referral
Mr.
or
Bennet's,
regarding
in
Pride
neutral
is
family
a
and
and
(46).
studied
social
Although Wickham talks a great deal about the
wrongs done to him in the past and about himself, he does
not want to draw attention to his true self and feelings.
Wickham
knows his
physical
good
looks
and
charm
are
enough to draw the attention of marriageable young women
and their mothers.
His congenial manner dupes many young
men, as well, especially his fellow officers, most of
whom are younger sons whose portions have paid for their
commissions.
Wickham
They understand and can commiserate with
regarding his
"inheritance,"
and
they provide
introductions into households holding promise for George
Wickham's marriage plans.
Talking
Wickham
with
reveals
Elizabeth
his
at
Mrs.
circumstances
and
Phillip's
house,
Darcy' s alleged
part in them.
He works Elizabeth's experience with Darcy
to his favor.
He enhances his own standing, humbly and
discreetly, putting the onus on Darcy: "I have no right
to give my opinion
otherwise.
. . .
as to his being agreeable or
I am not qualified to form one"
(67).
He
goes on, saying he has no reason to avoid Darcy, but if
Darcy does not want to see him, then Darcy must be the
one
to
leave
their
company.
He
ends
by
telling
Elizabeth, "I will not trust myself on the subject
. . .
I can hardly be just to him" (69).
His circuitous reasoning leaves Elizabeth with an
incredibly false impression of his status.
Wickham tells
her, "Upon my word, I say no more here than I might say
in any house in the neighborhood, except Netherfield
.
. .
You will not find [Darcy] more favourably spoken of by
(67).
any one"
Although Wickham has not lied, he has
given the impression that his inheritance from the elder
Mr. Darcy has been held up by Fitzwilliam Darcy for no
good
reason other
than
Darcyfs bad
temper
and
spite,
traits Wickham magnanimously decides to overlook, making
himself out to be the better bred, the better man, of the
two.
Elizabeth
family
is drawn into his
situation
seems
so
"problem."
similar.
Collins
Her
own
is
the
rightful heir to Longbourn, while
she and her sisters
will
inheritance
be
on
the
streets
without
because they were born girls.
Mrs.
or
home
Bennetfs constant
railing about the unfair consequences the entail has on
their ability to marry well has left all the girls with a
deep
dissatisfaction
settlement
inheritance
Wickham is able to manipulate Elizabethfs
practices.
emotions
for strict
through
manipulation
of
his
the
skilled
facts
use
of
regarding
language
the
and
Darcy
inheritance.
Darcy, Collins, and Bingley are described in terms
of their wealth, yet Austen describes Wickham in terms of
his good looks and charm (Morris 51).
Tara Wallace finds
Wickham to be "the most dangerous character
. . .
whose
formidable powers of conversation empower him to injure
others"
drive
(52).
behind
The power of inheritance language, the
Wickham's
forceful, if not more
itself.
success
so
far,
just
as
formidable than the inheritance
He easily manipulates Elizabeth's feelings about
Darcy for a good portion of the novel.
Miss
is
Darcy
to Elizabeth
successful with
all
to Miss
three.
He
He jumps from
King,
and
finally
is nearly
succeeds with
Lydia, compromising her integrity and jeopardizing her
sisters'
futures,
all
in
his
search
for money.
We
realize that even with his marriage to Lydia, Wickham has
no intention of abandoning his
search for a woman of
fortune.
Men categorize women in Pride and Prejudice as they
would in real life, by their marketability.
Austen uses
Wickham to show the crude and despicable depths to which
this practice
can
those
with
large
wealth
and
power,
Attaching
accumulate
a
sink.
Strict settlement works
estates
who
and
wife's
land
and
who
are
can
property
interest
or
aggrandizing
produce
using
is more
a
her
male
for
their
heir.
portion
acceptable
to
than
marrying a woman for love.
Yet, the standard works the
other way, as well.
Because
eligible women
are
commodified, men
like
George Wickham are capable of seducing women for their
wealth, securing from them an income and gaining position
without being born to it or having to earn it.
difference
between
Wickham
and
Here the
Collins becomes
clear.
Collins inherits Longbourn and merits his position at The
Rosings because he is legitimately eligible for the post.
Wickham, however,
was born the son of a servant; he gave
up his education, and now he uses the military only as a
means to gain access to eligible young women.
He relies
on his good looks and conversational skills to find a
good position
and a good wife.
Austen
allows us to
forgive Collins his obsequiousness, since he comes by his
inheritance and position fairly and without deception.
We are not allowed to do the same with Wickham, nor would
we want to.
Elizabeth affirms the mercenary side of the marriage
market and settlement practices when she replies to Mrs.
Gardiner's
remark about Wickham
calling on Miss King:
"[Kitty and Lydia] are young in ways of the world and not
yet open to the mortifying conviction that handsome young
men must have something to live on, as well as the plain"
(126).
In the end, with Lydia by his side, Wickham presses
his suit for the portion he must have before he will
marry her.
Mr. Bennet cannot hesitate, for without a
legal marriage to Wickham, Lydia will have no marriage at
all
and
will
be
homebound,
dishonored,
burden on the Bennet family's
Further,
Austen
predicament
Bennet]
in
had
relates
typical
never
become
a
already pressed finances.
the
solution
male
supposed
and
" [Mr.
terms :
financial
that,
Lydia's
to
could
Wickham
be
prevailed on to marry his daughter, it would be with so
little
inconvenience
to
arrangement" (249-50).
himself,
as
by
the
present
Compassion is not an option when
the reputation of a family name is at stake.
Mr. Bennet calculated that "[hle would scarcely be
ten pounds a-year the loser, by the hundred that was to
be paid for them
squeezing
Mr.
front
him,
of
payment.
. . ."
Bennet,
Darcy,
assuming
too,
(250).
Wickham believes he is
dangling
social
that
the
feels
as
the
degradation
basis
social
for
in
quick
bribery
and
determines to pay off Wickham. Beyond this, the practice
of
strict
settlement
demanded
financial base from their wives.
that
husbands
seek
a
Wickham understands the
practice
well
enough
to
know
that
at
his
marriage
settlement, Bennet would have settled a portion for all
of his younger children.
entire
matter
Scheuermann
blackmail
a
"trifling
believes
and
Bennet, however, considers the
his
"It
exertion"
is Wickham's
abnegation
of
(250).
callous
Mona
use
responsibility
offend Austen, not merely the fact that Wickham
of
that
seeks
some sort of financial base from his wife as wives often
do from their husbands" (207).
Austen
presents
us
with the short end of strict settlement practice in Pride
and
Prejudice .
marriage
does
She pointedly
not
always
alerts
fit
the
the
reader
classic
mold
that
of
settlement practices, the worst examples of which are the
five Bennet daughters and Wickham's
Pamela
Bromberg
"illustrate
the
proposes
dangers
that
of
marriage to Lydia.
Lydia
and
narcissistic
Wickham
egos
and
unprincipled greed" (131).
For women,
Lydia's
narcissism and greed
more dangerous than Wickham's.
seem far
Like her mother, she does
not see marriage for more than its appeal at the moment.
Mr. Bennet sees Lydia as a commodity, her escapade as an
expense of his marriage.
He tells Elizabeth that "Lydia
will never be easy till she has exposed herself in some
public place or other," and that her doing so now "under
the present circumstances" will cost the family "little
expense or inconvenience"
reminds
him
that
(189).
Lydia's
Elizabeth immediately
"present
circumstances"
are
ruinous to Elizabeth and her sisters and any future they
may hope to have (189).
If Lydia should fall a tainted
woman
her
outside
Lydia's
marriage,
self-centered needs
money, family, or future.
and wants.
sisters
do
not
will
take
fall,
into
too.
account
George Wickham is all she sees
At the same time, Mr. Bennet sees little
implication beyond the monetary and the momentary.
He
does not consider the possibility of having to care for
his daughters for the rest of his life because of the
silliness of the youngest.
Coupled with already straitened circumstances, the
rest of the Bennet sisters could lose what little chance
they
have
to
"marry
up."
Lady
Catherine de
Bourgh,
walking in the Bennet garden, tells Elizabeth she is "no
stranger to the particulars of your youngest sister's
infamous elopement," appalled at the prospect that "such
a girl [is] to be my nephew's sister?
Is her husband, is
the son of his late father's steward, to be his brother?"
(288).
A
woman's
lack
of
financial
power
is
often
accompanied by a lack of knowledge of the real world.
Lydia, like her mother, cannot see the financial side of
marriage or of the world.
Wickham set out to seduce
Lydia thinking there would be more of a settlement.
When
he finds there is little to be had from the family, and
that Mr. Bennet may not pay at all, he is ready to leave
When Darcy arranges the payoff, Wickham is finally
her.
ready to marry Lydia.
He is simply looking for the best
deal possible, but he also feels he has bettered Darcy by
making him pay.
As Darcy meets with him to arrange the
marriage, he asks Wickham why he has not married Lydia
already.
egoism:
The
answer
"Wickham
is
still
stunning
cherished
in
the
its
simplistic
hope
of
more
effectually making his fortune by marriage, in some other
country" (260).
Mr. Wickham is wicked because of what he is not and
what he does not say.
His silences and manipulation of
marriage settlement and inheritance language allow him to
seduce and ruin young women almost at will.
Austen
is able to give us
a
Further, if
credible Wickham
in her
story, then one can postulate there are many Wickhams in
real
life
playing
the
same
wicked
games
as
he.
Manipulating the language of inheritance allows men like
Wickham to manipulate the system and to fool petty or
naYve women like Miss Darcy, Elizabeth, Mrs. Bennet, Miss
King, and finally, Lydia.
Conclusion
In
Pride
and
Prejudice,
Austen
accentuates
foibles of strict settlement and its language.
the
Darcy
shines magnificently in the glow of his ten thousand a
year and Pemberley.
He can afford to glow, for strict
settlement and inheritance practices have worked well for
him.
The men on the fringe, Mr. Bennet, Collins, and
Wickham, paint a picture of what happens with everyday
people touched by the same laws that are meant to benefit
the landed gentry and the aristocracy.
Mr.
Bennet
is
removable entail.
an
inheritor, but
he
has
a
non-
He followed acceptable practice when
he resettled his estate, for he was sure he would have a
son.
the
Social and family pressure worked on him to repeat
entail.
The
Bennet
marriage
eighteenth-century standards.
is
a
paradigm
of
He marries Mrs. Bennet for
beauty and four thousand pounds, and she marries him for
position and comfort.
As both objectives begin to fade,
the marriage does as well.
Had Mr. Bennet removed the entail before he married,
it is also very possible that Mrs. Bennetfs "lack of
economy" could have run Longbourn into the ground long
before
the
entail
could
have.
Free
of
conditions,
portions of the land could have been sold to pay debts, a
fate that critics fail to evoke in the diatribe against
Mr. Bennet and the entail. Longbourn could have been lost
piece
by
piece
to
pay
debts,
reprehensible and unthinkable.
a
fate
perhaps
more
Austen's portrayal of the
Bennetfs estate problems is realistic and probably
far
more common than we would expect.
Mr.
Collins becomes
settlement once
Mr.
the
repository
Bennet made
the
remove the entail before he married.
unfortunately,
will
devolve
to
father both
made
the
the
decision
lawfs
not
to
The Bennet estate,
him.
depends on the distant past, when Mr.
Bennet's
of
decision
Collinsfs
luck
Bennet and Mr.
to
leave
the
entail in place until the birth of the next male Bennet.
Collins's
great good luck does everything to enhance his
position, but nothing to temper his personality or low
breeding.
The enlargement of his estate serves only to
magnify his shortcomings.
Most dangerous, however, is Mr. Wickham.
Like many
who sit close to great wealth, Mr. Wickham is sure that
because of his proximity to the senior Mr. Darcy, he too
should be accorded the same respect, love, and regard as
Fitzwilliam Darcy, heir apparent. He fills himself with
delusions, using them to build a past of half-truths and
a life of empty dreams.
He asserts to Elizabeth that the
church was his true calling, not the military.
He was
born for the church, but Darcy denied him an excellent
living (68).
He acts much like a spurned younger son,
rather than the son of a servant.
truth to Elizabeth:
Darcy reveals the
Wickham was well provided for and
could not settle on anything except money.
Even after
exhausting the good graces of the Darcy family, Wickham
continued to demand money and assistance in finding a
living (165).
Darcy's
letter reveals Wickham's
adamant
belief that he was entitled to preferment through the
senior Mr. Darcy' s will.
Wickham asks Elizabeth if she had traveled through
the village of Kympton on her way to Pemberley.
He tells
her that Kympton "is the living which I ought to have
had.
House!
A
most
delightful
place!
Excellent
parsonage
It would have suited me in every respect" (264).
Elizabeth hints she knows the circumstances surrounding
the living, yet Wickham is unfazed, telling her again why
he did not get it, continuing the narrative he wants her
to believe.
He talks of the late Mr. Darcy' s "uncommon
attachment" to him and to the jealousy it evoked in the
young Darcy, that being the root of the trouble between
them (69).
Even though the senior Darcy may have found
him more amiable than his own son, Pernberley and the
Darcy estate were never in danger of not being passed to
Fitzwilliam Darcy. He cannot consider thinking of himself
as
Lady
Catherine does, as
the
son of her brother's
steward.
Wickham, much like Collins, does not understand on
which rung of the economic and social ladders he belongs.
Catering to those on higher rungs and being liked by them
does not
automatically afford him a place with
them.
Wickham resorts to lying, extortion, and fraud in order
to mingle with the women he considers worthy of his hand.
He hopes that when he marries, his wife will bring him
the money and prestige he wants and thinks he deserves.
She will be the inheritance he believes is justly his.
Unlike Mr. Bennet, Mr. Collins, and Mr. Wickham,
Darcy is in possession of his property and inheritances,
and he knows the structure of strict settlement means
that
he
will
circumstances.
retain
his
property,
free
from
unseen
Alistair Duckworth calls this the "sense
of inherited security that is the birthright of the self
(2).
in Jane Austenfs world"
settlement and
primogeniture
machine for Mr. Darcy.
well
as
Austenrs
experience
the
women,
of
the best
strict settlement.
worked
Bennet,
effects
imposed even with
The instruments of strict
like
a
Collins,
represent
well-oiled
Wickham,
as
characters
unforeseen
who
circumstances
intentions of
the
law of
Duckworth points out that many of
Austenrs characters are exposed
to the uncertainty of
losing the comfort and security of "property" (3).
They
become "isolated from a stable and inherited 'estate,'"
and
then
suffer
station in
being
life, but
excluded
also
not
only
from "[their]
from
their
'grounds'
of
being and actionsf' (4).
Mr. Bennet, Mr. Collins, and Mr. Wickham do not have
the same control and confidence in their futures as Darcy
for the same reason that the practice of inheritance and
marriage
settlements overpowers "their ground of being
and action."
In stark contrast to the precarious states
of these three gentlemen, Judith Newton observes, "Darcy
is also presently aware of his power to bestow value,
whether it is his desirable attention or his desirable
fortune and
station"
(65).
The
positions of these men is startling.
contrast between
the
However, one must
consider a more startling event of the future: Mr. Darcy
and Mr. Collins could well find themselves in the same
position
as
Prejudice.
Mr.
Bennet
at
the
opening
of
Pride
and
Chapter Five
The Inheritance Novel
The case is strong for making a niche in eighteenthcentury
studies
novels
deal
for
with
inheritance
inheritance
novels.
problems
Many
and
early
strict
settlement practice, and use the language of inheritance
practices.
Eighteenth-century
upper
class
obsessions
with strict settlement and inheritance practice allowed
the language to become commonplace and powerful, useful
in
both
private
transactions.
and
public
conversations
and
Englishmen in the eighteenth century, even
before the emergence of the novel, were aware that one
vital social problem for them was the inter-penetration
of the middle class and the surviving aristocracy
(Sale
"From Pamela to Clarissa" 41) .
The power of inheritance practice manifested itself
in various
ways,
often
taking the
form of
an
estate
through which the wealth and power of a family could be
judged by anyone who saw it.
Money and other forms of
wealth were difficult to determine, hidden away from the
public view, but estates were realty, easily assessed by
the
public.
The
trappings-the
books-all
personalty
of
the
estate,
its
manor, the paintings, the furniture, the
were totted up and assessed as the taste and
distinction of a landed family and were open for public
consumption
as
continuity.
proof
of
their
lineage,
heritage
and
The estate was the tangible link between
ancestors and descendants (Habbakuk 60).
Marriage settlements were public affairs and wills
were private documents.
and private
stability
Each corresponds to the public
division of a
was
the
object
familyfs wealth.
of
great
Dynastic
families
and
of
families aspiring to greatness; the power of inheritance
provided the language through which
the upper classes
expressed a wish for further posterity, and through which
they signaled their social and political dominance.
Much
of the public speculated about these families, using a
general
knowledge of strict settlement practice and a
probable amount of guessing regarding invisible wealth,
such
as money,
stocks
and
bonds.
Strict
settlement
provided a general public stability to the continuity of
power and culture.
Wills were the variables, lending an
air of mystery and possibility to the transition of power
from one generation to the next.
The legal tendency of the eighteenth century, then,
was to express relationships in terms of transactions.
Marriage was viewed as a property transaction and the
legal rights of females were subjects of "inexhaustible
interest"; the law, which gave men a financial interest
in the chastity of women, reinforced this view (Langford
6-7).
As soon as she was contracted to a marriage, a
woman lost all right to dispose of her property without
the consent of her future husband.
At the same time, a
husband became the guardian of all legitimate children,
and as such, had the right to take them away from their
mother if he desired (Williams 6).
A womanfs obedience
to her husband, parents and family property, religion and
moral authority could all be means of protection against
predatory male behavior
(Calder 16).
A slip from the
rigid rules of life by a young eighteenth-century woman
could
mean
a
dangerous
trip
into
the
real
world
of
patriarchal power and politics, a trip often iterated in
the pages of the emerging novel.
The obsession of the public with strict settlement
visited authors as well as everyone else.
Those authors
who wrote inheritance novels were usually involved with
the
language
of
effects
of
strict
inheritance practice in some way.
settlement
As
and
Sale tells us,
authors during specific periods often incorporate into
their works the language and terms of a phenomenon within
their society, describing and using competing tensions
through representative characters and events that would
be
immediately
recognizable
to
their
contemporaries
("From Pamela to Clarissa" 39).
Authors of inheritance novels not only describe and
use
"competing
tensions,"
they
also
are
personally
familiar with or involved with inheritance practices and
language.
Richardson was editor of the Journal of the
House
Commons
of
during
a
period
introduced, debated and passed many
inheritance issues.
when
lawmakers
laws dealing with
The Speaker of the House of Commons
was a close friend and someone Richardson often talked
with concerning political issues.
Burney lived through
her stepmother's and stepsister's marriages, both fraught
with inheritance problems.
to
and,
thus,
inheritance
closely
predicament,
Burney was particularly close
aware
of,
made
more
her
bizarre
stepmother's determination to pilfer Maria's
for her own use.
stepsister's
by
her
inheritance
Austen also had a narrow escape from
the throes of strict settlement.
She watched as her
brothers profited
meant
for men,
from being male,
knowing
that
she
rising in a world
and
her
mother
and
sisters depended on them for regular assistance, helpless
and controlled existence, to say the least.
Authors
knowledge
empower
of
of
inheritance
inheritance
their
novels
and
characters'
use
marriage
actions
their
own
practices
and
to
experiences,
allowing inheritance language and practice to fuel the
plots
of their novels.
Allowing
Clarissa
Harlowe
to
remain single and rich, Richardson underscores the power
of individuality.
Clarissa was able to gather wealth
until her death and delegate it as she wished-a
clear
usurpation of power reserved for the males in her family
and
the
century.
larger
patriarchal
family
of
the
eighteenth
Although Richardson gives Clarissa the moral
authority to triumph ultimately, he also gives his male
characters the force of eighteenth-century law and duty
to
ruin
her
earthly
life
and
precipitate
her
death,
revealing a side of Richardson that favors male authority
(Beasley 37-42).
The males in Clarissars life shut her away from the
real
world,
inheritance
Lovelace.
of
positioning
the
dairy
themselves
house
and
against
against
her
Robert
Once her power to resist is gone, her only
recourse is to escape them.
Because of their obsession
with gaining a title, Clarissa must run away from her
filial
and
"freedom."
legal
responsibilities
in
order
to
find
Escaping the confinement of her home, she
finds herself closeted first among the wicked likes of
Mrs. Sinclair.
She eventually finds herself cloistered
among the marginalized.
As she nears death, she accepts
her
to
legal
obligations
write
her
will.
Through
writing, Clarissa is able to express her individual will
in
a
language
that
she,
among
Richardson's
other
writings, uses expertly to will away her possessions, but
more important, ultimately to tell her story.
Burney' s
John
Evelyn
circumvents
his
legal
responsibilities to his family by running to France to
marry the future Madame Duval.
Regretting his faux pas,
he lawfully wills his child, Caroline, to Mr. Villars to
break ties with his wife and provide what he hopes will
be
a
more
secure
future
for
his
daughter.
He
and
Clarissa Harlowe seem unable to grasp the significance of
the power of inheritance until death is upon them.
They
produce powerful legal documents on their deathbeds.
The legal guardianship of Caroline, commuted on John
Evelyn's deathbed, sets up the future actions in Evelina.
That body of law allowing John Evelyn to give his child
to whomever he pleases is the same body of law silencing
Evelina and keeping her from her legacy while elevating
an artificial heiress in her place.
Similarly, Evelina
is the artificial property of Mr. Villars, who views her
as an extension of his moral self, an unclaimed property,
free to be appropriated as his own representation (Tucker
5).
He raises her to be a model of himself, continuing
in his footsteps after his death.
It is Mrs. Selwyn,
another byproduct of settlements and jointures, a woman
not looked on kindly by the upper classes, who becomes
Evelinafs savior through her ability to manipulate the
language of male hierarchy.
Similarly, Austen hampered Mr. Bennet' s ability to
provide
for his family by having him to resettle his
estate long before the birth of his children, as was the
custom of his day.
In the end, his youthful decision
unfortunately allows him only to wait for his death while
the odious Collins waited with him.
With his death, the
profundity of Mr. Bennetts decision will become publicly
clear.
The Bennet daughters labor under the shadow of
being daughters of landed gentry with nothing to offer,
but
they,
thriftlessly.
like
their
mother,
continue
to
spend
While critics continue to call Mr. Bennet
to task for, among other things, not ridding his estate
of the entail, John Habbakuk
is very
clear about the
value of continuing it:
Family provision was a reason, independent of
dynastic ambition, for setting a high value on
the integrity of the paternal estate and one
which moved the family of a wife and not only
that
of
a
husband.
wife's
The
family
was
concerned to ensure that the husband could not
impair
his
ability
to
provide
for
wife
and
younger children by dissipating his estate or
by disinheriting them, and the most effective
way of doing this was to ensure that he was
made a life tenant. (14)
A man became a life tenant by resettling his estate at
marriage or majority by continuing the entail.
At the
same time, he ensured the financial and social stability
of future generations of his family.
Mr. Bennet looked
into the future with the resettlement of his estate at
marriage
and could not
foresee the absence of a male
heir.
The ability to maintain a title and rank through
generations
manifestation
in
the
of
continuity of rank
eighteenth
social
century
became
the
c ~ n ~ c i o u ~ n regarding
e ~ ~
(Habbakuk 59).
Mr. Bennet showed a
deviation from this preoccupation; for instance, he was
the first to visit Mr. Bingley, and he knew the extent
and value of his estate and the marriage-ability of his
daughters.
He
understood
his
was
aware,
position;
however,
there
were
that
no
he
alone
other
voices
sharing the pride he had for his family lineage, or the
fatalism with which he viewed his family's futures.
As guardians of their daughters, Mr. Harlowe, Mr.
Villars,
and Mr.
Bennet are
failures.
Maaja
Stewart
points out that Mr. Bennet and Mr. Villars abandon their
daughters through either helplessness or indolence (54).
This study argues that Mr. Harlowe is easily included in
this group of abandoners, for though he is life tenant on
his
estate,
he
still
has
authority
disinherit any of his younger
children
to
empower
or
(Habbakuk 15).
All three gentlemen take no real action to protect, let
alone advance, their daughters.
Strict
supported
settlement
forces
family estates.
be
at
emerging
odds
primogeniture
reaffirmation
of
were
perpetuity
the
for
At first blush, primogeniture appears to
with
during
of
and
the
the
spirit
of
eighteenth
individualism,
century.
also
Wealthy
landowners had a "personal stake in the maintenance of
power
and
interest
wealth
a
in
public
a
one,
nation,"
making
associating
public virtue with landed wealth"
their
the
private
"exertion
(Bellamy 2) .
of
However,
because daughters and younger children were being cared
for through settlement agreements, and wives were able to
retain more
jointure
of
undermine
of their personal property through either
trusteeships,
the
the
principle
general
of
trend
was
patriarchal
to
power.
Primogeniture successfully harmonized with individualism
(Stone 167) .
Liz Bellamy proposes that the economic boom at the
beginning of the eighteenth century allowed the monied
and upper classes to adopt a discourse of economy so
strong it influenced profoundly the writings of Defoe,
Fielding and others, and this influence in their writing
is the precursor to the economic discourse so visible in
the writing
of
Richardson
and Austen
(2-3).
In the
relationship between economics, the wealthy landed class
and
the
language
of
inheritance,
economic
boundaries
between the aristocracy, merchant and business classes,
and
freeholders blurred.
Peers were
related
to each
other through marriage and were related through marriage
to
the
wealthy
merchant
class
and
gentry,
as
well.
Others in those classes intermarried with the freehold
class, muddying hard social distinctions (Mingay 9).
Although Bellamy restricts her study to the earliest
novels, works involving economic and inheritance language
often
evolve
writers
of
into
the
the
narrative
mid-
and
practices
we
late-eighteenth
see
in
century.
Richardson, Burney and Austen share similarities in their
lives and themes, taking the economic theory of Bellamy
further
to
Certainly,
include
Alistair
the
economics
Duckworth
of
observes,
inheritance.
Richardson's
Clarissa offers similar dilemmas and responses to those
in
Austen,
with
authority and
the
conflict
in
individuality echoed
Clarissa
in Austen's
between
plots.
Ian Watt is the first of many to consider the legacy of
Richardson in Burney and the close connection between
Burney and Austen.
Richardson, Burney and Austen were
gentrified
and
authors,
as
such,
produced
gentrified
heroines able to disrupt class boundaries even further,
not only through marriage, but also through inheritance
problems and their disruptive language.
Conclusions about Clarissa, Evelina and
Pride and Prejudice
Clarissa is the premier model of what I have labeled
inheritance novels.
Clarissa blunts the ambitions of her
father, brother and uncles to gain a title by marrying
her to the higher bidder.
Her individuality and stubborn
self-will are empowered through her grandfather's
legal
will, leaving her the money and power to decide her own
future.
James Harlowe, Sr., also senses that Clarissa is
a challenge to his supremacy.
In his mind, she becomes
his problem child---one who brings problems and anxieties
of youth into young adulthood (Nelson 125).
One
would
reasonably,
but
like
Clarissa' s
there
is
never
father
any
to
act
question
of
more
Mr.
Harlowe's entitlement to the familial authority he exerts
and
then
Harlowe's
passes
to
his
son
(Scheuermann 63).
Mr.
son reaches majority and, as the father, Mr.
Harlowe, Sr., becomes tenant for life.
All the males of
the Harlowe family gather their fortunes in order to gain
a title and a vote, the ultimate power of landed gentry.
Clarissa inherits a dairy farm, and although she gives
managerial consent to her father, her power of legacy
causes a rift in family communications, aggravated by the
presence of Lovelace and brought to tragic ends by the
language of inheritance and the inability of the Harlowe
males
to
talk
of
anything
else.
The
older,
more
experienced males defer all judgment to James, Jr., who
schemes to confiscate the dairy house and marry Clarissa
to Solmes, connecting the Harlowe estate to his.
The
driving
the
desire
to
"raise
the
family"
is
beyond
control of the senior Harlowe men and proves ultimately
to be beyond the control of anyone.
The power of desire
is so strong, coupled with a language so powerful that
Mr. Harlowe, Sr., cannot speak and young James Harlowe
can speak of nothing else.
Evelina presents us with a notably different set of
inheritance problems.
Mr. Villars is guardian of John
Evelyn and then of Evelynfs child.
Caroline Evelyn asks
Villars to raise her child in the absence of the father,
yet that right is not hers.
Children belong to fathers.
Mr. Villars should feel it his duty to unite father with
child.
Instead,
Villars keeps the child and chooses to
raise Evelina, keeping her hidden from the world and from
her father.
Mr. Villars, like James Harlowe, Sr., and
his son, exerts his authority over Evelina, assuming the
final bequest of Caroline Evelyn as the legal gateway to
becoming Evelina' s de facto parent.
Villars'
own background lends him the ability and
character to raise three generations of Evelyns, but his
efforts
in
the
first
succeeds despite him.
two
cases
fail,
and
the
third
Mr. Villars is a product of his
own family inheritance, while the language of his own
family situation endows his
actions as he
raised the
Evelyn generations.
As a younger son, he is destined to
raise
the
daughters
in
same way
he
was
raised,
not
considering Evelina as the potential heiress she is, but,
more as an abandoned bastard.
Because inheritance is
beyond him, he believes it beyond his charge.
Pride and Prejudice offers a different problem of
inheritance,
but
one
that
surely
frequency in
eighteenth-century
arose
with
families and
some
one
that
affects one only our heroine, but also her father.
The
Harlowe men are despicable and are portrayed as such.
Mr.
Villars
has
a
generally is loved.
just man
with
a
questionable
but
he
Mr. Bennet, however, is a good and
generally bad
favorite, Elizabeth,
character,
recounts
reputation.
his bad
points.
Even
He
his
is
indolent and lackadaisical in his duties; his wife is the
butt of his humor.
He did at his marriage what many
others had done, as well as many
effects to their estates:
estate.
ill
He continued the entail on his
No one could foresee he would be given five
daughters.
would
after, with no
Mr. Bennet soon knew a distant male relative
wait
patiently
for
him
to
die.
Mr.
Bennet
inherited everything, then found his estate doomed and
his family a failure for want of a male heir.
All three fathers, Mr. Harlowe, Mr. Villars, and Mr.
Bennet,
share
a
silence
resulting
from
inheritance
practices and language.
The effect of inheritance on
these
heroines
guardians
heroinesf
of
abilities
our
to
act
and
directly
to
alters
inherit.
our
Still,
Clarissa Harlowe inherits the Kingdom of Heaven, Evelina
inherits her identity and destiny, and Elizabeth inherits
Pemberley and her birthright among
the landed gentry.
Our heroines rise above the problems of inheritance and
triumph in the face of law and land.
Liz Bellamy points out that Clarissa Harlowe, for
all her
sermonizing against loveless marriage
and her
penchant for running away with unsuitable men, is prudent
when prioritizing the financial information about Robert
Lovelace that would most importantly influence her family
In the same way, Evelina Anville thinks nothing of
money or its value until she comes upon her cousins, the
Branghtons.
Madame Duval's
her
"shocks"
cousins
introduction of Evelina to
Evelina
"extremely,"
as
she
is
described as the poor relation "without a friend in the
world besides" (76).
meeting
with
the
The Branghtons are Evelina's
nouveau
merchant
riche.
first
In
the
conclusion of her letter relating her first meeting with
them,
Evelina
says,
"I
am
sure
I
shall
not
be
very
ambitious of being known to any more of my relations, if
they have any resemblance to those whose acquaintances I
have
been
introduced
already"
(78).
Raised
in
the
country without benefit of city-knowledge or a father of
her own, Evelina reveals her consciousness of the power
of manners, character and breeding she inherited from her
ancestors,
even
though
she is
raised as
an
unclaimed
daughter and disinherited heir.
The Branghtons represent
money
for
that
paralleling
does
not
Collins
make
in
up
Pride
and
lack
of
character,
Prejudice.
Evelina
learns, as do Clarissa and Elizabeth, that breeding makes
a lady.
Darcy, Lovelace and Orville are possessed, as
only Clarissa is, among the women, of financial acumen
and
economic
knowledge
usually
associated
with
businessmen and not nobility, while all the women spring
from the business, the upper, merchant class
(Bellamy
75).
Elizabeth Bennet is struck by the estate of which
she "might have been mistress," and by the realization
that "to be mistress of Pemberley might be something!"
(202, 201).
Bennet
Until she comes upon Pemberley, Elizabeth
discounts
the
Fitzwilliam Darcy.
wealth
and
inheritance
of
When she see what power, wealth and
inheritance bring and sees the responsibility Darcy must
bear because of his inheritance, she begins to understand
the prudence of striving for both Darcy and his estate.
Many
of
the
lessons
in
eighteenth-century
inheritance literature comes from the characteristics and
actions
of
characters
Evelina's
its
and
characters.
their
actions
Comparisons
abound.
between
For
instance,
mother is silent through her absence, but she
speaks through the letters she left with Villars.
importantly,
she
speaks
resemblance to her.
mother's
our
and
through
Evelina's
More
stunning
Villars, however, regulates both
daughter's
power
to
speak
through
the
patriarchal powers as surrogate father, guardian to both.
Elizabeth Bennet's
mother can speak, but the more she
speaks,
she
the
less
says.
She
is
rendered
silent
through
her
thoughtlessness
and
shallowness.
She
understands only the consequences of the entail, though
she
is
not
able
counteract it.
to
form
a
plan
for
the
future
to
The entail for Mrs. Bennet was something
"beyond reason," the object against which she "continued
to rail bitterly," bemoaning the "cruelty of settling an
estate away from a family of five daughters, in favour of
a man whom nobody cared anything about" (54).
If there
were anyone to blame for five daughters, the eighteenthcentury would
would
have
generally blame
laid
the
her.
penchant
for
squarely on the shoulders of the wife.
Mrs. Bennet's
and
her
Medical
tradition
having
daughters
Notwithstanding,
whining accusations silence her daughters
husband
to
the
detriment
of
everyone
in
the
family.
Mrs.
Bennet's
chatter, which, more
daughters'
futures,
silence
comes
than being
for
her
from
her
useless
harmless, hinders her
own
conduct
comes
into
question even with Darcy, who is not sure he wants to
bring
someone like Mrs.
family.
Bennet
into his distinguished
Austen is careful to develop both Mrs. Bennet
and Miss Bingley with the same backgrounds, contrasting
them
with
daughters
the more
ephemeral
and
de
Miss
qualities
Bourgh,
who
of
have
the
Bennet
inherited
a
quality
of
burgeoning
character
wealthy
seemingly
merchant
their gentrified parent.
the
Harlowe
family,
Harlowers weakness
class,
to
inherited
the
through
If we extend this argument to
one
and
unavailable
can
silence
easily
as
the
identify
result
Mrs.
of
the
Harlowe men drowning her out despite her breeding and the
fundamental
wealth
she
brought
to
her
marriage.
Richardson magnifies her inherited importance by endowing
her second daughter, Clarissa, with her noble character
and aristocratic breeding and without her cultural desire
to be a weak and silent woman.
Maaja
Bennet .
Stewart
Stewart
Duval' s vanity
and
contrasts
believes
Madame
Burney
Duval
with
emphasizes
selfishness; Austen,
Mrs.
Mrs.
Madame
Bennetts
stupidity (54). However, for vanity and selfishness, one
should
Bourgh.
compare
Madame
Duval
with
Lady
Catherine
de
Both have French names; both are mistresses of
fortunes, allowing them language and legal power.
Both
are highly opinionated and easily provoked to lend their
opinions in order to benefit those they feel are in need
of their worthy advice.
Madame Duval rails against the
foibles
and
of
the
British
the
boorish
behavior
of
Captain Mirvan, never thinking herself in the same class
and
from the same country as he.
Lady Catherine de
Bourgh
advises
everyone
on
everything,
considering
herself an ultimate expert, a privilege stemming from her
position as heiress with the intimation of past Norman
governance.
Madame Duval represents the worst of women involved
in the ups and downs of the eighteenth-century marriage
market,
covering
in
her
her
youth
bawdy
hawking
barmaid
her
roots
beauty
in
and
charm,
to
seduce
order
wealth and power from a susceptible young man as quickly
as she could.
Lady de Bourgh, on the other hand, reminds
us that the Norman Conquest continues.
advice
are
authoritative
Norman
century
critical
descendant,
victory.
She
considered
Unlike Mrs.
to
as
Her guidance and
understanding
albeit
through
represents
what
wrong
women
Selwyn, who
with
her
as
marriage,
the
an
of
eighteenth
having
power.
is able to save the day
for
Evelina, Lady Catherine de Bourgh tries her hardest to
ruin the day for Elizabeth Bennet in order to push her
own private agenda.
Further, Madame
Duval and Lady de Bourgh
fading beauty only they cannot bear to lose.
widows with no power in the market to remarry.
share a
They are
Though
they have money and power, they are still irrelevant in
patriarchal, patrilineal England.
They are symbols of
the passing cultural values and the progress of society.
Madame Duval fights her age through clownish makeup and
inappropriate dress and manners.
lover,
but
not
another
She assumes a young
husband.
Lady
Catherine
is
subtler, taking on many of the characteristics of her
deceased husband, assuming his role and placing herself
in the patriarchal position of authority and power.
understand
money,
that
another
marriage
means
their voice and their power.
losing
Both
their
Lady de Bourgh,
Madame Duval and Mrs. Selwyn make us realize that the
eighteenth century viewed power in women as something to
make them masculine; money is a masculine form of power,
turning women into men or monsters.
Not
only
the
women
invite
comparison,
however.
There can be no more inviting or striking comparison than
between Villars and Wickham.
Personalities aside, their
backgrounds and youthful aspirations and predicaments are
much the same.
Lawrence Stone proposes that the number
of bachelors among the younger children of upper-class
families was growing in the eighteenth century, and if
they could not marry a fortune, they were pushed out of
the
family into one
of the professions
(243).
Villars and Wickham are pushed out into professions.
Villars
goes willingly; Wickham
does not.
Both
Mr.
Both men,
reaching majority,
could
not
continue to
live in
the
lifestyle in which they were raised; they went into the
world with a small portion and a jaundiced view of the
rules of inheritance and primogeniture.
Sentiment alone
provides a language through which both men relate their
Villars raises
family experiences to those around them.
three generations of Evelyns in his own image.
Wickham,
without benefit of a real estate, makes his dreams into
the stuff of a cause celebre, setting out to convince
himself and a sympathetic, rich young woman that he was
unjustly denied a rightful inheritance.
Liz Bellamy points out that the mid-century novel
developed at a time of social and moral uncertainty, with
a variety of competing images for the individual and his
or her relationship to the larger community (61). At the
same time, John Richetti advises that the mid-eighteenthcentury novel was a
form of public debate on current
issues, a conversation of sorts, taking place in some
sense in the public sphere, pushing itself forward as an
expression
of
the
individuals (125).
self-assertion
and
satisfaction
of
Our characters become part of that
forum, giving another voice to the debate.
WORKS CITED
Alliston, April. Virtue's Faults: Correspondence in
Eighteenth-Century British and French Women's
Fiction. Stanford: Stanford UP, 1996.
Armstrong, Nancy. Desire and Domestic Fiction.
York: Oxford UP, 1987.
New
Austen, Jane. Pride and Prejudice. 1813. Ed. Vivien
Jones. London: Penguin, 1996.
Barchas, Janine. The Annotations in Lady Bradshaiqhfs
Copy of C l a r i s s a . Toronto: University of Victoria,
1998.
Beasley, Jerry C. "Richardonfs Girls: The Daughters of
Patriarchy in Pamela, Clarissa and Sir Charles
Grandison." New Essays on Samuel Richardson. Ed.
Albert J. Rivero. New York: St. Martins, 1996.
35-49.
Bellamy, Liz. Commerce, Morality and the EighteenthCentury Novel. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1998.
Bowers, Toni. The politics of motherhood: British
writing and culture 1680-1760. Cambridge: Cambridge
UP, 1996.
Boxer, Marilyn J. and Jean H. Quataert, Eds. Connecting
Spheres: Women in the Western World, 1500 to the
Present. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1987.
British Parliamentary Papers.
UP, 1968.
"Index."
Shannon: Irish
Brodrick, George W., The Honorable. England Land and
Enqlish Landlords: An Enquiry into the Origin and
Character of the Enqland Land System, with Proposals
For its Reform. London: Cassell, Petter, Galpin
and Co., 1881.
Bromberg, Pamela. "Teaching About the Marriage Plot."
Approaches to Teaching Austen's P r i d e a n d P r e j u d i c e .
Ed. Marcia McClintock Folsom. New York: MLA, 1993.
Burney, Frances. Cecilia. 1782. Ed. Peter Saber and
Margaret Anne Doody. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1994.
----------
London:
Evelina. 1778. Ed. Margaret Anne Doody.
Penguin, 1994.
Calder, Jennie. Women and Marriaqe in Victorian
Literature. New York: Oxford UP, 1976.
Campbell, Gina. "Bringing Belmont to Justice: Burney's
Quest for Paternal Recognition in Evelina."
Eiqhteenth-Century Fiction. 3:4 (1999): 321-340.
Chesterman, M. R. "Family Settlements on Trust:
Landowners and the Rising Bourgeoisie." Law,
Economy and Society, 1750-1914: Essays in the
History of English Law. Ed. G.R. Rubin and David
Sugarman. Abingdon: Professional Books Ltd., 1984
124-168.
Cooper, J.P. "Patterns of inheritance and settlement
by great landowners from the fifteenth to the
eighteenth centuries." Family and Inheritance:
Rural Society in Western Europe, 1200-1800. Ed.
Jack Goody, Joan Thirsk and E. P. Thompson.
Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1976. 192-312.
Copeland, Edward W. "Money in the Novels of Fanny
Burney." Studies in the Novel 8 (1976): 24-37.
Cutting-Gray, Joanne. "Writing Innocence: Fanny Burney's
Evelina." Tulsa Studies in Women's Literature. 9:l
(1990): 43-57.
Dobbin, Marjorie. "The Novel, Womenfs Awareness, and
Fanny Burney." English Language Notes. 22:3 (1985):
42-52.
Doody, Margaret Anne. "Beyond Evelina: The Individual
Novel and the Community of Literature." EighteenthCentury Fiction. 3:4 (1991): 359-371.
---------- . Introduction. Evelina.1772. By Frances
Burney.
London: Penguin, 1994.
Dowling, William. "Evelina and the Genealogy of Literary
Shame." Eighteenth-Century Life. 16 (1992): 208-
Duckworth, Alistair. The Improvement of the Estate: A
Study of Jane Austenrs Novels. Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins UP, 1971.
Dykstal, Timothy. "Evelina and the Culture Industry."
Criticism: A Quarterly for Literature and the Arts.
37: 4 (1995): 559-581.
Eaves, T. V Duncan and Ben D. Kimpel. Samuel Richardson:
A Biography. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971.
Epstein, Julia. "Burney Criticism: Family Romance,
Psychobiography, and Social History." EiqhteenthCentury Fiction. 3:4 (July 1991): 277-282.
---------- .
"Fanny Burney's Epistolary Voices."
Eighteenth Century-Theory
27:2 (1986): 162-179.
The
and Interpretation.
Frega, Donnalee. Speaking in Hunqer: Gender, Discourse,
and Consumption in C l a r i s s a . Columbia: U of South
Carolina, 1998.
Frow, John. Marxism and History.
1986.
Cambridge: Harvard UP,
Goldberg, Rita. Sex and Enliqhtenment: women in
Richardson and Diderot. Cambridge: Cambridge UP,
1984.
Green, Katherine Sobba.
A Feminized Genre.
1991.
The Courtship Novel: 1740-1820.
University of Kentucky Press,
Greenfield, Susan. " 'Oh Dear Resemblance of Thy
Murdered Motherf : Female Authorship in Evelina."
Eighteenth-Century Fiction. 3:4 (1991): 301-320.
Habbakuk, John. Marriaqe, Debt and the Estate Systems:
Enqlish Landownership 1650-1950. Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1984.
Habermas, Jurgen. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions
to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy.
Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996.
Hill, Christopher. "Clarissa Harlowe and Her Times."
Essays in Criticism. 5 (1955): 315-340.
Johnson, Claudia. Jane Austen: Women, Politics, and the
Novel. Chicago: U Chicago PI 1988.
Johnson, Samuel. "Rambler No. 4." Samuel Johnson: A
Critical Edition of the Major Works. Oxford: Oxford
UP, 1984.
Jones, Vivien. Ed. The Young Lady's Pocket Library, or
Parental Monitor. Thoemrnes Press, 1995.
----------- . Introduction. Pride and Prejudice.
Jane Austen. London: Penguin, 1996.
Kilpatrick, Sarah.
Day, 1981.
Fanny Burney.
By
New York: Stein and
Lams, Victor. Anger, Guilt and the Psychology of Self in
Clarissa. New York: Peter Lang, 1999.
Langford, Paul. Public Life and the Propertied
Englishman 1689-1798. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991.
Langland, Elizabeth. "Teaching About Language: A Feminist
and Formalist Approach to Close Reading." Approaches
to Teachinq Austen's P r i d e and P r e j u d i c e . Ed. Marcia
McClintock Folsom. New York: MLA, 1993. 140-147.
Locke, John. An Essay Concerning Human Understandinq.
Ed. John W. Yolton. London: Everyman, 1977.
London, April. Women and Property in the EighteenthCentury Enqlish Novel. Cambridge: Cambridge UP,
McMaster, Juliet. "Talking about Talk." Approaches to
Teaching Austen's Pride and Prejudice. Ed. Marcia
McClintock Folsom. New York: MLA, 1993.
Mingay, G. E. English Landed Society in the Eighteenth
Century. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1963.
Morris, Ivor. Mr Collins Considered: Approaches to Jane
Austen. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1987.
Namier, Sir Louis. Enqland in the Aqe of the American
Revolution. 2nd Ed., nc: np, 1961.
Nelson, TGA. Children, Parents and the Rise of the
Novel. Newark: U Delaware P, 1995.
Newton, Judith Lowder. Women, Power and Subversion:
Social Strategies in British Fiction 1778-1860.
Athens: U Georgia P, 1981.
Nokes, David. Jane Austen: a life.
Strauss and Giroux, 1997.
New York: Farrar,
Oakleaf, David. "The Name of the Father: Social Identity
and the Ambition of Evelina." Eighteenth-Century
Fiction. 3:4 (1991): 341-358.
Parker, Ian. Discourse Dynamics: Critical Analysis for
Social and Individual Psychology. London: Routledge,
1992.
Pawl, Amy. " 'And What Other Name May I Claim?' Names
and Their Owners in Frances Burney's Evelina."
Eiqhteenth-Century Fiction. 3:4 (July 1991): 283299.
Perry, Ruth. "Home at Last: Biographical Background to
Pride and Prejudice." Approaches to Teaching
Austen's Pride and Prejudice. Ed. Marcia McClintock
Folsom. New York: MLA, 1993.
Richardson, Samuel. Clarissa, or the History of a Young
Lady. London: Penguin, 1985.
----------- . The Richardson-Stinstra
Correspondence and Stinstrafs Preface to Clarissa.
Ed. William C. Slattery. Carbondale: Southern
Illinois UP, 1969.
.
---------Familiar Letters on Important Occasions.
Rpt. 1928. London: George Routledge and Sons, Ltd.
1741.
Richetti, John. "The Public Sphere and the EighteenthCentury Novel: Social Criticism and Narrative
Enactment." Eighteenth-Century Life 16 (1992):
114-129.
Ross, Angus. Introduction. Clarissa, or the History of
a Young Lady. By Samuel Richardson. Oxford:
Penguin, 1985.
Sale, William. "From Pamela to Clarissa." Essays on the
Eighteenth-Century
Novel.
Ed.
Robert
Specter.
Bloomington: U Indiana P, 1965. 39-48.
---------- .
Samuel Richardson: master printer.
Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1950.
Scheuermann, Mona. Her Bread to Earn: Women, Money, and
Society from Defoe to Austen. Lexington: U Kentucky
P, 1993.
Schwarz, Joan. "Clarissa and the Law."
Wisconsin, 1992.
Diss. U. of
Shaffer, Julia. "Empowering Women in the Marriage Plot."
Criticism 34:l (1992): 51-73.
Sherman, Sandra. Finance and Fictionality in the early
eighteenth-century. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1996.
Spacks, Patricia Meyer. Imagininq a Self: Autobiography
and the Novel in Eighteenth Century England.
Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1976.
Speck, W. A. Stability and Strife, England 1714-1760.
Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1977.
Spring, Eileen. Law, Land and Family: Aristocratic
Inheritance in Enqland, 1300 to 1800. Chapel Hill:
University of North Carolina Press, 1993.
Spring, Eileen. "The Family, Strict
Historians." Law, Economy, and
1914: Essays in the History of
David Sugarman and G. R. Rubin.
Professional Books Ltd., 1984.
Settlement and
Society, 1750English Law. Ed.
Abingdon:
168-191.
Stewart, Maaja A. Domestic Realities and Imperial
Fictions: Jane Austen's Novels in the EiqhteenthCentury Context. Athens: U Georgia P, 1993.
Stone, Lawrence. The Family, Sex and Marriage in England
1500-1800. Abr. Ed. New York: Harper, 1977.
Straub, Kristina. Divided Fictions: Fanny Burney and
Feminine Strateqy. Lexington: U Kentucky P, 1987.
Suarez, Michael F. "Asserting the Negative:
'Child' Clarissa and the Problem of the 'Determined
Girl'".
New Essays on Samuel Richardson. Ed.
Albert J. Rivero. New York: St. Martin's,
1996. 69-83.
Sugarman, David. Ed. Law, Economy, and Society, 17501914: Essays in the History of English Law. Intro.
Abingdon: Professional Books Ltd., 1984. 1-124.
Thirsk, Joan. "The European debate on customs of
inheritance, 1500-1700." Family and Inheritance:
Rural Society in Western Europe, 1200-1800. Ed.
Jack Goody, Joan Thirsk, and E. P. Thompson.
Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1976. 177-191.
Thompson, James. Models of Value: Eighteenth-Century
Political Economy and the Novel. London: Duke UP,
1996.
Trickett, Rachel. "The Background" from Jane Austen and
Education." Critical Assessments, Vol. 11. East
Sussex: Helm Information, 1998.
Trumbach, Randolph. The Rise of the Egalitarian Family:
Aristocratic Kinship and Domestic Relations in
Eighteenth-Century Enqland. New York: Academic
Press, 1978.
Tucker, Irene. "Writing Home: 'Evelina,' the epistolary
ELH, 60:2
Novel and the paradox of property." (1993): 419-440.
"Villein." Def. 1. The New Shorter Oxford English
Dictionary. 1993.
Wallace, Tara Ghoshal. Jane Austen and Narrative
Authority. New York: St. Martins, 1995.
Watt, Ian. The Rise of the Novel: Studies in Defoe,
Richardson and Fielding. Berkeley: U California P,
1959.
Williams, Merryn. Women in the English Novel 1800-1900.
New York: St. Martin's, 1984.
Woolf, Virginia. A Room of One's Own.
Cambridge UP, 1995.
Cambridge:
Zomchick, John. Family and the Law in Eighteenth-Century
Fiction: The Public Conscience in the Private
Sphere. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1993.
Zonitch, Barbara. Familiar Violence: Gender and Social
Upheaval in the Eighteenth-Century Novel. Newark:
U Delaware P, 1997.
BIOGRAPHY OF THE AUTHOR
L i n d a S c o t t was b o r n o n S t a t e n I s l a n d ,
N e w York,
and
a t t e n d e d p u b l i c schools a l l over t h e e a s t e r n seaboard as
h e r f a m i l y f o l l o w e d h e r f a t h e r t h r o u g h h i s career i n t h e
Coast Guard.
Linda a t t e n d e d Davis and E l k i n s College and
graduated with
a BA i n E n g l i s h i n
r e c e i v e d h e r MA i n E n g l i s h
a t Orono.
Linda
husband George.
lives
the
Doctor
In
1992,
she
from t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f Maine
i n Roswell,
New
Mexico,
with
her
She i s a n a s s i s t a n t p r o f e s s o r o f E n g l i s h
a t New Mexico M i l i t a r y I n s t i t u t e .
for
1970.
of
Philosophy
Linda is a candidate
degree
Individualized
E n g l i s h f r o m The U n i v e r s i t y o f Maine i n August,
2003.
in