Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T14:31:59.818Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Love, Honor, and Obedience: Fashionable Women and the Discourse of Marriage in the Early Eighteenth Century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2014

Ingrid H. Tague
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

To speak plainly, I am very sorry for the forlorn state of Matrimony, which is as much ridicul'd by our Young Ladys as it us'd to be by young fellows; in short, both Sexes have found the Inconveniencys of it, and the Apellation of Rake is as genteel in a Woman as a Man of Quality…. You may Imagine we marry'd Women look very silly; we have nothing to excuse our selves but that twas done a great while ago and we were very young when we did it (Lady Mary Wortley Montagu to the Countess of Mar).

In this letter to her sister, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu expresses what was in the early eighteenth century a commonplace view of wedlock. Marriage, she writes, is such an object of mockery that even women have lost interest in it and married women like herself must “excuse” themselves for their unfashionable behavior. Obviously, Lady Mary's tone is light, but she expresses ideas that were being argued quite seriously in a variety of circles. Many of her contemporaries believed that marriage was deteriorating into a business contract. Rather than being respected as an institution ordained by God and necessary to social stability, the argument went, marriage was an object of mockery, used only as a cynical means of increasing wealth. Brides were being bought and sold with no regard for their future happiness or compatibility with their husbands. Most famously, perhaps, this notion was exploited in William Hogarth's series, Marriage à la Mode (1745), its very title embodying the idea that mercenary marriage was a new fashion.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 40 , Issue 1 , January 2001 , pp. 76 - 106
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference of British Studies 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Lady Mary Wortley Montagu to the Countess of Mar, 31 October [1723], The Complete Letters of Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, ed. Halsband, Robert, 3 vols. (Oxford, 1965–1967), 2:32Google Scholar.

2 Steele, Richard, The Conscious Lovers [1722]Google Scholar, in Kenny, Shirley Strum, ed., The Plays of Richard Steele (Oxford, 1971), pp. 295–381Google Scholar. One of the most popular plays of the eighteenth century, it was performed 190 times before 1747: Kavenik, Frances, British Drama, 1660–1779: A Critical History (New York, 1995), p. 244, n. 46Google Scholar. The most overt expression of the view of marriage in the comedies of manners came in the “proviso scenes,” in which the hero and heroine negotiated the terms of their relationship and the heroine guaranteed her autonomy after marriage. For readings that highlight related aspects of Restoration comedies, see Canfield, J. Douglas, Tricksters and Estates: On the Ideology of Restoration Comedy (Lexington, Ky., 1997)Google Scholar; Braverman, Richard, Plots and Counterplots: Sexual Politics and the Body Politic in English Literature, 1660–1730 (Cambridge, 1993)Google Scholar; Brown, Laura, English Dramatic Form, 1660–1760: An Essay in Generic History (New Haven, Conn., 1981)Google Scholar.

3 See, e.g., Spectator, nos. 149 (21 August 1711), 199 (18 October 1711), 268 (7 January 1712), 437 (22 July 1712), 511 (16 October 1712), in Bond, Donald F., ed., Spectator, 5 vols. (Oxford, 1965)Google Scholar. On other periodicals, see Ballaster, Roset al., Women's Worlds: Ideology, Femininity and the Woman's Magazine (Basingstoke, 1991), chap. 2Google Scholar; Shevelow, Kathryn, Women and Print Culture: The Construction of Femininity in the Early Periodical (London, 1989)Google Scholar.

4 Richardson, Samuel, Pamela; or, Virtue Rewarded [1740–1741] (New York, 1958)Google Scholar.

5 Most famous is Stone, Lawrence, The Family, Sex and Marriage in England, 1500–1800 (New York, 1977)Google Scholar. For similar arguments, with somewhat different chronologies, see Lewis, Judith Schneid, In the Family Way: Childbearing in the British Aristocracy, 1760–1860 (New Brunswick, N.J., 1986)Google Scholar; Trumbach, Randolph, The Rise of the Egalitarian Family: Aristocratic Kinship and Domestic Relations in Eighteenth-Century England (New York, 1978)Google Scholar.

6 Stone, Lawrence, Broken Lives: Separation and Divorce in England, 1660–1857 (Oxford, 1993), pp. 27–28Google Scholar. See also his Uncertain Unions: Marriage in England, 1660–1753 (Oxford, 1992), pp. 12–13, 31–32Google Scholar.

7 Outhwaite, R. B., “Marriage as Business: Opinions on the Rise in Aristocratic Bridal Portions in Early Modern England,” in Business Life and Public Policy, ed. McKendrick, N. and Outhwaite, R. B. (Cambridge, 1986), pp. 21–37Google Scholar; Cooper, J. P., “Patterns of Inheritance and Settlement by Great Landowners from the Fifteenth to the Eighteenth Centuries,” in Family and Inheritance: Rural Society in Western Europe, 1200–1800, ed. Goody, Jack, Thirsk, Joan, and Thompson, E. P. (Cambridge, 1976), p. 222Google Scholar.

8 See Erickson, Amy Louise, Women and Property in Early Modern England (London, 1993), chaps. 6–8Google Scholar; Staves, Susan, Married Women's Separate Property in England, 1660–1833 (Cambridge, Mass., 1990)Google Scholar; Bonfield, Lloyd, Marriage Settlements 1601–1740: The Adoption of the Strict Settlement (Cambridge, 1983)Google Scholar; Okin, Susan Moller, “Patriarchy and Married Women's Property in England: Questions on Some Current Views,” Eighteenth-Century Studies 17 (1983): 121–38Google Scholar.

9 See, among many others, Vickery, Amanda, The Gentleman's Daughter: Women's Lives in Georgian England (New Haven, Conn., 1998), chap. 2Google Scholar; Macfarlane, Alan, Marriage and Love in England: Modes of Reproduction, 1300–1840 (New York, 1986)Google Scholar; Houlbrooke, Ralph, The English Family, 1450–1700 (London, 1984)Google Scholar; Wrightson, Keith, English Society, 1580–1680 (New Brunswick, N.J., 1982), pp. 78–81Google Scholar. For descriptions of loving seventeenth-century couples, see, e.g., Larminie, Vivienne, Wealth, Kinship and Culture: The Seventeenth-Century Newdigates of Arbury and Their World (Woodbridge, 1995)Google Scholar; Schwoerer, Lois, Lady Rachel Russell: “One of the Best of Women” (Baltimore, 1988)Google Scholar; Macfarlane, Alan, The Family Life of Ralph Josselin: A Seventeenth-Century Clergyman (Cambridge, 1970)Google Scholar.

10 Lemmings, David, “Marriage and the Law in the Eighteenth Century: Hardwicke's Marriage Act of 1753,” Historical Journal 39 (1996): 339–60Google Scholar; Langford, Paul, Public Life and the Propertied Englishman, 1689–1798 (Oxford, 1991), pp. 6–7Google Scholar, and A Polite and Commercial People: England, 1727–1783 (Oxford, 1989), pp. 114–15Google Scholar.

11 Ingrassia, Catherine, Authorship, Commerce, and Gender in Early Eighteenth-Century England: A Culture of Paper Credit (Cambridge, 1998), esp. chap. 1Google Scholar; Gallagher, Catherine, Nobody's Story: The Vanishing Acts of Women Writers in the Marketplace, 1670–1820 (Berkeley, 1994)Google Scholar; Pocock, J. G. A., Virtue, Commerce, and History (Cambridge, 1985)Google Scholar.

12 The standard work on the subject is McKendrick, N., Brewer, J., and Plumb, J. H., The Birth of a Consumer Society: The Commercialization of Eighteenth-Century England (Bloomington, Ind., 1982)Google Scholar.

13 Brewer, John, The Pleasures of the Imagination: English Culture in the Eighteenth Century (New York, 1997), esp. chap. 1Google Scholar; Barker-Benfield, G. J., The Culture of Sensibility: Sex and Society in Eighteenth-Century Britain (Chicago, 1992), chap. 4Google Scholar.

14 See Weil, Rachel Judith, “Sexual Ideology and Political Propaganda in England, 1680–1714,” (Ph.D. diss., Princeton University, 1991), chaps. 2–3Google Scholar; Sommerville, Margaret, Sex and Subjection: Attitudes to Women in Early-Modern Society (New York, 1995), pp. 174–217Google Scholar; Pateman, Carole, The Sexual Contract (Cambridge, 1988)Google Scholar; Amussen, S. D., “Gender, Family and the Social Order, 1560–1725,” in Order and Disorder in Early Modem England, ed. Fletcher, Anthony and Stevenson, John (Cambridge, 1985), pp. 196–217Google Scholar; Okin, Susan Moller, “Women and the Making of the Sentimental Family,” Philosophy and Political Affairs 11 (1981): 65–88Google Scholar; Shanley, Mary Lyndon, “Marriage Contract and Social Contract in Seventeenth Century English Political Thought,” Western Political Quarterly 32 (1979): 79–91Google Scholar.

15 See, e.g., Wall, Alison, “Elizabethan Precept and Feminine Practice: The Thynne Family of Longleat,” History 75 (1990): 23–38Google Scholar; Peterson, M. Jeanne, “No Angels in the House: The Victorian Myth and the Paget Women,” American Historical Review 89 (1984): 677–708Google Scholar.

16 The most comprehensive survey to date of conduct or “courtesy” literature for both men and women is Childs, F. A., “Prescriptions for Manners in English Courtesy Literature, 1690–1760, and Their Social Implications,” (D. Phil, thesis, University of Oxford, 1984)Google Scholar.

17 The above statistics are based on an examination of the English Short-Title Catalogue (ESTC) and the bibliography of Childs, “Prescriptions for Manners.” Both Richard Allestree and the Marquess of Halifax were also frequently quoted without attribution in other conduct books; see Tague, Ingrid H., “Women and Ideals of Femininity in England, 1660–1760” (Ph.D. diss., Brown University, 1997), pp. 64–66Google Scholar. Childs estimates that each edition averaged about 1,000 copies: “Prescriptions for Manners,” pp. 29–31.

18 Vivien Jones presents an intriguing argument for the possibility of “transgressive” readings of conduct literature: “The Seductions of Conduct: Pleasure and Conduct Literature,” in Pleasure in the Eighteenth Century, ed. Porter, Roy and Roberts, Mary Mulvey (New York, 1996), pp. 108–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 See Kugler, Anne, “Prescription, Culture, and Shaping Identity: Lady Sarah Cowper (1644–1720)” (Ph.D. diss., University of Michigan, 1994)Google Scholar.

20 For particularly influential articulations of this view, see Armstrong, Nancy, Desire and Domestic Fiction: A Political History of the Novel (Oxford, 1987)Google Scholar, and “The Rise of the Domestic Woman,” in The Ideology of Conduct, ed. Armstrong, N. and Tennenhouse, L. (New York, 1987), pp. 96–141Google Scholar; Jones, Vivien, Women in the Eighteenth Century: Constructions of Femininity (London, 1990), esp. pp. 14–17Google Scholar.

21 Thus, we can distinguish between etiquette books, which do provide such detailed instruction, and conduct books, which have as their goal creating a moral woman rather than merely a polite one.

22 Bland, James, An Essay in Praise of Women; or, A Looking-Glass for Ladies to See Their Perfections In (London, 1733), p. 45Google Scholar. Peter Earle points out that affluent middle-class wives left work as soon as opportunity permitted, a practice that calls into question the existence of widespread rejection of aristocratic sloth in favor of domestic industry: The Making of the English Middle Class: Business, Society and Family Life in London, 1660–1730 (London, 1989), pp. 159–73Google Scholar.

23 See George, Baron Lyttelton, Advice to a Young Lady (London, 1731)Google Scholar. The readers of the Spectator included many aristocrats, for instance.

24 Perry, Ruth, The Celebrated Mary Astell: An Early English Feminist (Chicago, 1986), app. B, pp. 339–54Google Scholar. These included “Advice to a Daughter,” probably the Marquess of Halifax's work, which was often known by that name. See also Kugler, “Prescription, Culture, and Shaping Identity.” For addresses to “ladies,” see the titles of the various works cited in this essay.

25 Tague, , “Women and Ideals of Femininity,” pp. 80–103Google Scholar.

26 Fletcher, Anthony, Gender, Sex and Subordination in England, 1500–1800 (New Haven, Conn., 1995), pp. 395–400Google Scholar. Susan Moller Okin discusses the role of the sentimental family in upholding modern patriarchy in “Women and the Making of the Sentimental Family,” pp. 65, 73–74.

27 An Essay on Modern Gallantry. Address'd to Men of Honour, Men of Pleasure, and Men of Sense. With a Seasonable Admonition to the Young Ladies of Great Britain (London, 1750), pp. 44–45Google Scholar.

28 The Ladies Complete Letter-Writer; Teaching the Art of Inditing Letters on Every Subject That Can Call for Their Attention, as Daughters, Wives, Mothers, Relations, Friends, or Acquaintance, 2d ed. (London, 1765), p. 106Google Scholar; Lyttelton, Advice to a Young Lady, lines 99–106; The Young Gentleman and Lady Instructed in Such Principles of Politeness, Prudence, and Virtue, as Will Lay a Sure Foundation for Gaining Respect, Esteem, and Satisfaction in This Life, and Eternal Happiness in a Future State …, 2 vols. (London, 1747), 2:278–79Google Scholar.

29 Ladies Complete Letter-Writer, p. 134.

30 This is the assumption behind Stone's Family, Sex and Marriage.

31 Mendelson, Sarah and Crawford, Patricia, Women in Early Modern England, 1550–1720 (Oxford, 1998), p. 132Google Scholar; Sommerville, , Sex and Subjection, pp. 79–83Google Scholar.

32 This conception of love thus has both similarities and differences from the twentieth-century notion of romantic love, which privileges the internal emotional aspects and which stresses the individual's state of mind rather than the external results of a relationship between two people.

33 Advice to the Ladies: A Poem: With an Elegiac Complaint on the Death of the Inimitable Alexander Pope Esq. (London, 1745), line 325Google Scholar.

34 Essex, John, The Young Ladies Conduct: Or, Rules for Education, under Several Heads; with Instructions upon Dress, Both before and after Marriage. And Advice to Young Wives (London, 1722), pp. 70–71Google Scholar.

35 Pollock, Linda, “Review Article: ‘An Action like a Strategem’: Courtship and Marriage from the Middle Ages to the Twentieth Century,” Historical Journal 30 (1987): 492CrossRefGoogle Scholar. It is important to keep in mind that the idea of marriage as a contract does not imply equality between the contracting parties; the contract between master and servant or apprentice provided an obvious and compelling example of such inequality.

36 A Dialogue concerning the Subjection of Women to Their Husbands … in Which Is Interspersed, Some Observations on Courtship, for the Use of the Batchelors (London, 1765), p. 15Google Scholar.

37 F. L., esq. [pseud.], The Virgin's Nosegay, or, The Duties of Christian Virgins … to Which Is Added, Advice to a New Married Lady (London, 1744), pp. 185–86Google Scholar.

38 Staves, Married Women's Separate Property.

39 Young Gentleman and Lady Instructed, 2:318–19Google Scholar. Most of this passage is a quote from the Spectator, no. 295 (7 February 1712), showing the close association between that periodical and conduct literature; the Spectator can, in many respects, be seen as a conduct manual.

40 Dialogue concerning the Subjection of Women, pp. 24–25.

41 Wilkes, Wetenhall, A Letter of Genteel and Moral Advice to a Young Lady: In Which Is Digested into a New and Familiar Method, a System of Rules and Informations, to Qualify the Fair Sex to Be Useful and Happy in Every State (Dublin, 1740), p. 117Google Scholar.

42 Marriott, Thomas, Female Conduct: Being an Essay on the Art of Pleasing: To Be Practised by the Fair Sex, before, and after Marriage (London, 1759), p. 18Google Scholar.

43 Young Gentleman and Lady Instructed, 2:331Google Scholar.

44 Young Gentleman and Lady Instructed, 2:343–44Google Scholar.

45 See, e.g., Richardson, Samuel, Familiar Letters on Important Occasions [1741], ed. Downs, B. W. (London, 1928), pp. 61–64Google Scholar; Essex, , Young Ladies Conduct, pp. 71–73Google Scholar.

46 [Hill, John], The Conduct of a Married Life: Laid Down in a Series of Letters, Written by the Honourable Juliana-Susannah Seymour, to a Young Lady, Her Relation, Lately Married, 2d ed. (London, 1754), pp. 225–26Google Scholar.

47 See Shoemaker, Robert B., Gender in English Society, 1650–1850: The Emergence of Separate Spheres? (London, 1998), p. 92Google Scholar; Mendelson, and Crawford, , Women in Early Modern England, pp. 129–31Google Scholar.

48 Mendelson and Crawford usefully caution against taking women's correspondence at face value without thinking of their “awareness of their readers' expectations” (Women in Early Modern England, p. 126), but it is precisely this awareness that makes such correspondence a valuable source for the historian.

49 Pollock, “‘Action like a Strategem’”; Beckett, J. V., The Aristocracy in England 1660–1914 (Oxford, 1986), pp. 103–8Google Scholar; Malcomson, A. P. W., The Pursuit of the Heiress: Aristocratic Marriage in Ireland, 1750–1820 (Belfast, 1982)Google Scholar; Thomas, David, “The Social Origins of Marriage Partners of the British Peerage in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries,” Population Studies 26 (1972): 99–111Google Scholar. For the variety of factors at play in the marriages of one aristocratic family, see Tillyard, Stella, Aristocrats: Caroline, Emily, Louisa and Sarah Lennox, 1740–1832 (London, 1994)Google Scholar.

50 Lord Cowper to Mary Clavering [1706], Hertfordshire Record Office (HRO), D/EP F193.

51 Lord Cowper to Mary Clavering, “Thursd. 9. clock morn” [1706], HRO, D/EP F193.

52 From this comes the frequent insistence of scholars that conduct literature reflected or created “middle-class” values. See Armstrong, Desire and Domestic Fiction; Jones, , Women in the Eighteenth Century, pp. 14–17Google Scholar.

53 Letters of Anne, Countess of Strafford, to Thomas, Earl of Strafford, British Library (BL), Add. MS 22226.

54 Lady Strafford to Lord Strafford, 8 October 1711, BL, Add. MS 22226, fol. 1r.

55 Lady Strafford to Lord Strafford, 21 December 1711, BL, Add. MS 22226, fol. 47r; Spectator, no. 488.

56 Lady Strafford to Lord Strafford, 18 January 1711/12, BL, Add. MS 22226, fol. 73r.

57 Lady Strafford to Lord Strafford, 25 December 1711, BL, Add. MS 22226, fol. 52v.

58 Elizabeth Montagu to Anne Donnellan, 5 December 1742, Montagu, Matthew, ed., The Letters of Mrs. Elizabeth Montagu, with Some of the Letters of Her Correspondents, 4 vols., 3d ed. (London, 1810–1813), 2:243Google Scholar.

59 Lady Mary Pierrepont to Edward Wortley, ca. 15 June 1712, Halsband, , ed., Complete Letters, 1:124–25Google Scholar.

60 Lady Mary Wortley Montagu to Edward Wortley, 22 October [1712], Halsband, , ed., Complete Letters, 1:168–69Google Scholar.

61 Ann Granville to Lady Catherine Throckmorton, 26 September 1739, Llanover, Lady, ed., The Autobiography and Correspondence of Mary Granville, Mrs. Delany: With Interesting Reminiscences of King George the Third and Queen Charlotte, 1st ser., 3 vols. (London, 1861–1862), 2:62Google Scholar.

62 Elizabeth Robinson to Duchess of Portland, 1738, Montagu, , ed., Letters of Mrs. Elizabeth Montagu, 1:38Google Scholar.

63 Frances Boscawen to Edward Boscawen, 23 December 1756, Aspinall-Oglander, Cecil, ed., Admiral's Wife: Being the Life and Letters of the Hon. Mrs. Edward Boscawen from 1719 to 1761 (London, 1940), pp. 243–44Google Scholar.

64 See n. 52 above.

65 See Mendelson, and Crawford, , Women in Early Modern England, pp. 133–35Google Scholar, for a similar argument.

66 Lord Cowper to Lady Cowper, 24 September 1706, HRO, D/EP F193; Lady Cowper to Lord Cowper, 26 September 1706, HRO, D/EP F59.

67 Lady Strafford to Lord Strafford, 11 December 1711, BL, Add. MS 22226, fol. 43r.

68 Lady Strafford to Lord Strafford, 25 March 1712, BL, Add. MS 22226, fol. 111r.

69 Lord Cowper to Lady Cowper, 24 September 1706, HRO, D/EP F193.

70 Elizabeth Montagu to Gilbert West, 16 October 1755, Montagu, , ed., Letters of Mrs. Elizabeth Montagu, 3:338Google Scholar.

71 Lady Mary Wortley Montagu to Edward Wortley, 22 August [1713], Halsband, , ed., Complete Letters, 1:195Google Scholar.

72 This is quoted in Finch, Pearl, History of Burley-on-the-Hill, Rutland: With a Short Account of the Owners and Extracts from Their Correspondence and Catalogue of the Contents of the House (London, 1901), 1:206Google Scholar.

73 Lady Mary Wortley Montagu to Edward Wortley, ca. 12 October 1714, Halsband, , ed., Complete Letters, 1:231Google Scholar.

74 Stone, Lawrence, Road to Divorce: England 1530–1987 (Oxford, 1990), pp. 149–52, 159–68, 191–206, 231–46, 309–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and see the case studies in his Broken Lives, which also provides a concise summary of the various ways of ending a marriage.

75 Sedgwick, Romney, ed., Lord Hervey's Memoirs: Edited from a Copy of the Original Manuscript in the Royal Archives at Windsor Castle (London, 1952), p. 40Google Scholar. Information in this paragraph comes from Melville, Lewis, Lady Suffolk and Her Circle (London, 1924), chap. 10Google Scholar; Croker, J. W., ed., Letters to and from Henrietta, Countess of Suffolk, and Her Second Husband, the Hon. George Berkeley; from 1712 to 1767, 2 vols. (London, 1824)Google Scholar; and internal evidence from the manuscripts discussed below.

76 This could be a justifiable complaint in spite of the wife's lack of common-law property rights, since two-thirds of her £6000 portion was supposed to be set aside for the purchase of land, the interest from which was to be her separate estate. She also retained the right to will away the property if he died first. See marriage settlement of Henrietta Hobart and Charles Howard, Norfolk Record Office (NRO), MS 22953 Z76 (Hobart).

77 For the view of one such skeptic, see Lord Egmont's diary entry, 16 November 1734, Historical Manuscripts Commission, Egmont Diary, 2:133–34Google Scholar. But there can be little doubt that the affair was real; in addition to the gossip of contemporaries like Lord Hervey, there is the large financial settlement made by the prince on Mrs. Howard, referred to below.

78 Henrietta Howard, personal memorandum, 29 August 1716, BL, Add. MS 22627, fol. 13r–13v. This is the entirety of the piece. She appears to have made some minor revisions of it for rhetorical effect, so it is possible that she planned to distribute it to a wider audience at some point, but there is no evidence that she did so, and its abrupt ending suggests that she used it primarily as a thought piece. I have inserted paragraph breaks for clarity. Melville, in Lady Suffolk and Her Circle, prints this document (pp. 156–57) as well as many of the letters discussed below. However, his editing and dating are often questionable, and so I refer throughout to the original manuscripts.

79 Henrietta apparently took advantage of the opportunity provided when the king turned out the Prince of Wales and his household from St. James's Palace and left along with the household.

80 Henrietta Howard to Charles Howard [ca. 1717], BL, Add. MS 22627, fol. 16r–16v. Henrietta's letters in the correspondence that follows are drafts of letters she sent to her husband. On women's need to portray themselves as passive victims in legal disputes with their husbands, see Mendelson, and Crawford, , Women in Early Modern England, p. 133Google Scholar; Hunt, Margaret, “Wife Beating, Domesticity, and Women's Independence in Eighteenth-Century London,” Gender and History 4 (1992): 10–33Google Scholar.

81 Henrietta Howard to Charles Howard [ca. 1716–17], BL, Add. MS 22627, fol. 18r–18v.

82 Henrietta Howard to Charles Howard, 15 May 1727, BL, Add. MS 22627, fol. 37r–37v. In the sixteenth century, Lady Elizabeth Willoughby used a similar argument when she said she could not promise to obey her husband lest he give her a command against the interests of the Queen whose servant she was. He was unimpressed, as was the female descendant who recorded the case in the early eighteenth century. See Friedman, Alice T., House and Household in Elizabethan England: Wollaton Hall and the Willoughby Family (Chicago, 1989), pp. 61–62Google Scholar.

83 Charles Howard to Henrietta Howard, 18 May [1727], BL, Add. MS 22627, fol. 39r. He, in turn, attempted to use the influence of both George I and the archbishop of Canterbury to force Henrietta out of the princess's service: Archbishop of Canterbury to the Princess of Wales [1727], BL, Add. MS 22627, fols. 28-29; Sedgwick, , ed., Hervey's Memoirs, pp. 135–37Google Scholar; Melville, , Lady Suffolk and Her Circle, pp. 159–60Google Scholar.

84 Charles Howard to Henrietta Howard, 22 February [1727/28], BL, Add. MS 22627, fol. 21r.

85 Henrietta Howard to Charles Howard, 25 May 1727, BL, Add. MS 22627, fol. 40r.

86 See Pollock, Linda A., “Living on the Stage of the World: The Concept of Privacy among the Elite of Early Modern England,” in Rethinking Social History: English Society 1570–1920 and Its Interpretation, ed. Wilson, Adrian (Manchester, 1993), p. 88Google Scholar. It is worth remembering that letters themselves were not considered the exclusive, private communication of one individual to another but were routinely passed around among family and acquaintances and frequently published as well (with or without the author's consent).

87 J. Darnall to Henrietta Howard, 23 December 1727, BL, Add. MS 22627, fols. 19r–20r.

88 Depositions of Anne Hall and Anne Cell, 4 November 1727, BL, Add. MS 22627, fols. 43r–46v. It is interesting that the abuse in this case consisted not of physical violence but of Mr. Howard's demands that she perform household tasks she considered beneath her rank. The specifics of these depositions and their implications are discussed in Tague, “Women and Ideals of Femininity,” pp. 257–59.

89 Henrietta Howard to Charles Howard [1727?], BL, Add. MS 22627, fol. 24r.

90 Charles Howard to Henrietta Howard, 2 May [1727], BL, Add. MS 22627, fol. 30r–30v.

91 Henrietta Howard to Charles Howard [May 1727], BL, Add. MS 22627, fol. 30r–30v.

92 Henrietta Howard to Charles Howard, 15 May 1727, BL, Add. MS 22627, fol. 37v.

93 Henrietta Howard to Charles Howard, 25 May 1727, BL, Add. MS 22627, fol. 42r–42v.

94 Settlement in trust for Henrietta Howard, 12 March 1722 [i.e., 1723], NRO, MS 22955 Z76 (Hobart).

95 Separation settlement for Henrietta and Charles Howard, 29 [sic] February 1717 [i.e., 1718], NRO, MS 22956 Z76 (Hobart).

96 Melville, , Lady Suffolk and Her Circle, p. 213Google Scholar.