Women of England

by Bartlett Burleigh James

Referring again to Fielding, we get what is probably a truer picture of the times in this respect than could be penned from the hasty observations of a traveller. A young fellow who has led astray his landlady's daughter is addressed by his uncle in the following manner: "Honour is a creature of the world's making, and the world has the power of a creator over it, and may govern and direct it as they please. Now, you well know how trivial these breaches of contract are thought; even the grossest make but the wonder and conversation of the day. Is there a man who afterwards will be more backward in giving you his sister or daughter, or is there any sister or daughter who would be more backward to receive you? Honour is not concerned in these engagements." It need not be supposed that such sentiments were general; but that they were all too prevalent is manifested by the literature that mirrors the times.

Drinking and swearing, the coarse associations of the alehouse, the obscene jokes and sallies which were indulged in freely in such places and made up a great part of the conversation, were conducive to a very low moral standard for men, and there was nothing in the times to lead women to uphold higher ideals of conduct than those which were imposed upon them by the male sex. Consequently, they were accustomed to a lower standard than would be tolerated to-day; but as libertinism was largely concerned with the outcast element of society, the women of the homes were not called upon to sacrifice integrity of character for its satisfaction. So that the lower moral standard was set up for men, and a woman who would attempt at once to maintain her respectability and follow such courses would very soon have found that difference in standards for the sexes visited a stricter condemnation upon her than upon the male delinquent.

The testimony of foreigners to the chastity of the English matron quite coincides with that which comes from English sources. Le Blanc remarks: "Most of those who among us pass for men of good fortune in amours would with difficulty succeed in addressing an English fair. She would not sooner be subdued by the insinuating softness of their jargon than by the amber with which they are perfumed." Another observer, of the same nationality, speaking of the unassailability of the English woman, attributes it to the insurmountable rampart which she had in the love for her family, the care of her household, and her natural gravity, and says that he does not know any city in the world where the honor of husbands is in less danger of deflection than in London.

The social hypocrisy of the eighteenth century, as it relates to woman, was due to the failure as yet to place the sex in correct adjustment with the times. Instead of considering her as having serious qualities and value other than the realization of matrimony, everything that entered into woman's life pointed in that one direction. The art of pleasing was not cultivated as an opportunity of the sex due to their special graces of spirit and of person, which might legitimately be employed for their own sake to make the world happier and brighter. There was not afforded to men the restfulness and pleasure in the company of women which would serve as a delightful foil to the practical and anxious cares of their daily lives; nor were women taught to believe in themselves as capable persons in the spheres of life in which feminine personality, taste, and touch best affect and mould civilization. Except in a few notable cases, literature and art, to say nothing of science, were outside of woman's sphere, because she neither believed in herself nor was seriously regarded by men as a factor in any of the wide relations of life other than those which were involved in her sex. The arts of the toilette, conversation, and deportment were all in which she was considered to need to be adept. Where naturalness was suppressed, it is not strange that the young women should have been influenced by false standards; false modesty, false sensitiveness, false ignorance, were depended upon to give them the artlessness and innocence of deportment which should recommend them to the blasé men of the times.

The estimate in which the sex was held was not quietly accepted by all women; although the new woman had not appeared upon the horizon, there were not wanting women who realized that their position was a humiliating one, and who sought to create a sentiment for its betterment. Mary Astell was one such, and the case as presented by her shows the superficiality of the conventional routine of a woman's life. She says: "When a young lady is taught to value herself on nothing but her cloaths, and to think she's very fine when well accoutred; when she hears say, that 'tis wisdom enough for her to know how to dress herself, that she may become amiable in his eyes to whom it appertains to be knowing and learned; who can blame her if she lays out her industry and money for such accomplishments, and sometimes extends it farther than her misinformer desires she should?... If from our infancy we are nurs'd upon ignorance and vanity; are taught to be proud and petulant, delicate and fantastick, humourous and inconstant, 'tis not strange that the ill effects of this conduct appear in all the future actions of our lives.... That, therefore, women are unprofitable to most, and a plague and dishonor to some men, is not much to be regretted on account of the men, because 'tis the product of their folly in denying them the benefits of an ingenuous and liberal education, the most effectual means to direct them into, and secure their progress in, the ways of virtue."

A French writer criticised the Englishmen of the day for their failure to avail themselves of the refining influence of women, in whose graces, he affirmed, there could be found constant charm and a certain sweetness peculiar to the sex. He said that the conversation of the women would polish and soften the manners of the men and enable them to contract a manner and tone which would be agreeable to both sexes; and he ascribed the bluntness of the English character to this lack of the refining influence of female society.

As women were left so largely to their own devices, falling the comradeship of men, they gave themselves over to the needle as the chief resource for idle hours. The Female Spectator protested against this excessive needlework on the part of women: "Nor can I by any means approve of your compelling young ladies of fortune to make so much use of the needle, as they did in former days, and some few continue to do.... It always makes me smile when I hear the mother of fine daughters say: 'I always keep my girls at their needle;' one, perhaps, is working her a gown, another a quilt for a bed, and a third engaged to make a whole dozen shirts for her father. And then, when she had carried you into the nursery and shown you them all, add: 'It is good to keep them out of idleness; when young people have nothing to do, they naturally wish to do something they ought not,'" With such a narrow circle of interest, it was not strange that women who had leisure should have wasted it in frivolity.

Gambling among women of fashion was more a result of too much leisure and too little intellectual stimulus than an indication of vicious propensities. The Female Spectator, from which we have quoted, in an article in 1745, relating an account of the visit of a country lady to a London friend, furnishes an illustration of the extent and effects of the vice. The article recites that after knocking a considerable time at the door of her friend's house,—the hour was between eleven and twelve o'clock in the day,—a footman, with his nightcap on and a general appearance of having risen from the dead, responded to her inquiry for her friend, in the interim of his yawns: "We had a racquet here last night, and my lady cannot possibly be stirring these three hours." The surprised visitor refrained from asking any questions concerning this unintelligible answer, and, after leaving her name, returned again at three o'clock. She had the good fortune to be admitted, and found her friend at her chocolate. She had a dish of this in one hand, and with the other she seemed to have been busy in sorting a large pile of guineas, which she had divided in two heaps on the table before her. Rising, she greeted her visitor with great civility, and expressed regret at the latter's disappointment on first calling, saying, with a smile, that when her friend had been a little longer in town, she would lie longer in bed in the morning. She then enlightened her as to the term "racquet," telling her that when the number assembled for cards exceeded ten tables the game was so styled; if fewer, it was called a "rout"; and if there were but two tables, it was a "drum."