Letters

‘I have now attained the true art of letter-writing, which we are always told, is to express on paper exactly what one would say to the same person by word of mouth’

Jane Austen writing to her sister Cassandra, January 1801.

 

It is for this reason that letters play such an important part in our research. They provide us with a glimpse of the relationship between individual family members, through the frequency of correspondence, subjects discussed and the language used. We can see in Jane Austen’s novels the importance of letters between siblings such as Elizabeth and Jane from Pride and Prejudice or Fanny and William from Mansfield Park. Sense and Sensibility was originally written in an epistolary form, like Frances Burney’s Evelina and other novels from the period. Such novelists evidently believed that a story and understanding of characters could be conveyed effectively through letters.



Letter from Elizabeth Temple to her brother Henry1st
Viscount Palmerston (with the permission of the Special Collections,
 Hartley Library, University of Southampton).

 

This is why letters provide a valuable source for understanding family relationships. As mentioned in previous posts, families of the Georgian gentry were very mobile – it was uncommon for all members of the family to be together at the same time. Letters were therefore crucial for relaying news and maintaining family bonds despite separation.

The choice of how to open and close letters provides an immediate insight into the relationship between the correspondents. Throughout his youth at Harrow School, then at University in Edinburgh and Cambridge Henry Temple (the future Prime Minister, Lord Palmerston) signs his letters to his mother, ‘ever your affectionate son.’ Similarly his sisters Frances and Elizabeth write to their ‘Dear Mama’ from ‘Your most affectionate daughter.’ Such affection was not only reserved for females, the Rev. James Austen (Jane Austen’s eldest brother) addressed his son as ‘My dear Edward.’

But how far can we take this as evidence of close relationships? Whilst some historians have used it as evidence for increasingly loving family relationships, others suggest it is simply a change in the etiquette of letter writing. Whilst this may be true, it shows family members were prepared to use more sentimental language towards one another; it’s hard to imagine a university student today ending an email to his parents ‘ever your affectionate son.'

Perhaps stronger evidence of close familial bonds is the frequency of communication. A common theme in letters we have read is that of mothers telling their sons to write more often. Henry Temple’s mother regularly admonished him for not writing often enough, asking for a minimum of one letter a week. Similarly Melesina Trench wrote to her son Charles, ‘I write to say how impatient I grow for a line from you.’ In another letter she voices her concern at a rumour she has heard:

‘Oh my dearest Charles, if you really have been overturned, if you are lying such at the house of a friend, if you do not write because your dear hand is disabled – these are the thoughts that flash like lightning across my mind’

Letters provided assurance that family members, who may be away for months or years at a time, were safe. By the age of eighteen Henry Temple clearly understood his mother’s concerns and wrote to her ‘because I know it will be of satisfaction to you to hear that I am well.’

Letter from Mary Mee to her son Henry Temple,
3rd Viscount Palmerston (with the permission of the Special Collections,
Hartley Library, University of Southampton).

However it was not only mothers anxious for their children’s safety. In a letter to his son Edward, Rev James Austen writes:

‘You say you would like a letter from home once a week, and you ought to be gratified in so reasonable a wish, especially as it gives us pleasure to write to you.’

Whilst letters have their limitations, as indeed any historical source does, they shed light on the relationship between the correspondents. The letters sent between members of these three, Hampshire based gentry families clearly show loving, affectionate relationships. Whilst it is important not to draw conclusions only from the type of language used, when considered in conjunction with the frequency of letters and their content, it is clear that these family members had real concern and affection for each other.