Scan barcode
tozette's review
4.5
This is a history book that uses examples from Jane Austen novels and also from her relatives and other temporally colocated Georgians to illustrate the careers of non-inheriting gentlemen in the late 18th and early 19th centuries.
So it opens by asking "if the Bennet sisters had all been boys, what would they have done?" and ends by speculating on the answer to that question. In the middle, there's a chapter for each category of gentlemanly profession, ranging from the Church of England to the East India Company.
I do think the framework of "Jane Austen's England" and references to her books is a cynical effort to make the text that Muir actually wanted to write more easily marketed. I found the Austen references amusing asides, but not necessarily well integrated with the whole.
But I nevertheless enjoyed nearly everything about this book:
So it opens by asking "if the Bennet sisters had all been boys, what would they have done?" and ends by speculating on the answer to that question. In the middle, there's a chapter for each category of gentlemanly profession, ranging from the Church of England to the East India Company.
I do think the framework of "Jane Austen's England" and references to her books is a cynical effort to make the text that Muir actually wanted to write more easily marketed. I found the Austen references amusing asides, but not necessarily well integrated with the whole.
But I nevertheless enjoyed nearly everything about this book:
- Its scope is narrow enough to feel actually interesting and not so shallow as some other history books
- I love the little excerpts from journals and letters that illustrate how these professional men wrote (and spelled!) and how they felt in their own voices
- The arrangement of chapters felt organic and orderly and easily understood, and the writing is sedate, unobtrusive and comprehensible, without being stiff or boring
- I love the inflation index and the efforts to make the salaries discussed make more sense to modern readers, even in the broadest strokes, and the occasional aside that described what kind of life such a salary might get you
- It was interesting and valuable to read reflections on what motives may have caused certain families to choose certain professions, especially as regards the value of connections and patronage
My chief complaint is that the book is VERY LITERALLY FALLING APART, although this fault cannot fairly be attributed to its writer. It is a recent publication but I had pages just come out no fewer than four times. Rory Muir may be blameless in this, but Yale University Press is not.
I think this book has achieved precisely what the writer wanted it to, and it was easy to read to boot — certainly easier than some novels I've been attempting recently! Great stuff.
I think this book has achieved precisely what the writer wanted it to, and it was easy to read to boot — certainly easier than some novels I've been attempting recently! Great stuff.
Content Warnings
This is a history book, but it seems pertinent to point out that there is an entire section on the East India Company. Given that critiquing colonial violence is not the purpose of the text, and given that it is a history book that uses a lot of contemporary sources, it glosses over many of the profoundest abuses of power that the English enacted upon India. On this basis, it may not be the best fit for all readers.
dxk's review against another edition
funny
informative
reflective
medium-paced
4.75
A must for austenites!
caitibeth's review against another edition
5.0
If the five Bennet daughters from Pride & Prejudice had been the five Bennet sons, what would their paths in life have looked like?
This is a thoroughly fascinating book, well-researched and laid out with clarity and verve. One of my favorites so far this year. Highly recommended.
This is a thoroughly fascinating book, well-researched and laid out with clarity and verve. One of my favorites so far this year. Highly recommended.
snakeling's review against another edition
informative
inspiring
medium-paced
5.0
An engaging look at the lives and careers of the sons who didn't inherit in Georgian England. It draws from real life examples as well as contemporary fiction and manages to give figures while never being dry.
jackiehorne's review against another edition
4.0
Muir has collected information published about the professions open to Regency-era gentlemen from other sources (both fictional and scholarly) and compiled them into one easy-to-read volume. The opening chapter explains the position of younger sons in the Regency period: those who were not the heir to the family estate/fortune almost always had to work. "Their father, and when he died their eldest brother, would continue to use whatever influence he possessed to help them along, but their success would largely depend on their own endeavors and their own good fortune" (1). Since deference to authority, including family authority, played a far larger role in social relations than it does today, younger sons did not generally protest this unequal treatment, but instead accepted their inferior position and small (if any) inheritance without complaint. "Younger sons were much more likely to regard each other as competitors for the limited rewards on offer than as fellow sufferers in an unjust society" than to join together in protest (5).
Younger sons could maintain their status by inheriting a fortune from a friend or more distant family member (such legacies typically went to the 2nd son); by marrying an heiress; or by pursuing a career. As heiresses and fortunes were far from common, most younger gentry sons pursued the third option. As most of us are likely aware, the professions that one could pursue and still maintain the title "gentleman" were limited:
The Church
The Law
The Navy
The Army
Banking
Overseas trade
Other branches of commerce (but not manufacturing or retail)
Government service
Colonizing
And, more rarely, Medicine
The second chapter focuses on money, and how much of it one needed in order to support oneself, and a family, if one wished to be regarded as genteel.
The average income of knights and squires in the period: £1,500
The average income of a gentleman of private means: £700
The average income of a baronet: £3,000
The average income of a peer: £8,000
A family could hardly maintain the appearance of gentility on anything less than £300; a single man on £150-200.
An income of £1,000 could support a genteel family of husband, wife, and three children, allowing them 3 female servants, a coachman, a footman, a carriage, and a pair of horses, leaving £100 for unexpected expenses.
An income of £1,500 would give the family above two additional servants (a maid and a groom), a gig or other small, light two-wheeler as well as a large carriage, and a third horse. They would also eat better.
An income of £2,000 would allow the same family 10 servants, 2 carriages, and five horses, and to spend more on provisions.
Given that one needed a fortune of £40,000 to secure an annual income of £2,000 a year, a younger son would have to not just do well but excel in his career in order to gain this high level of social status.
Chapters 3-12 each focus on a different profession, detailing what level of social status drew the most younger sons to the profession; how one broke into the field; what qualifications were required (or were not); what one's family had to pay (in money or connections/patronage) to find a son a place; how long families had to support their sons while they established themselves in a profession; what a typical career in that profession was like; how one advanced in it; what one typically earned; how that profession rated in terms of gentility; the benefits and drawbacks to such a career; and a wealth of examples of actual men who succeeded and fared poorly in each.
Fascinating fact: a genteel family had on average 5-6 children who survived to adulthood, but only 3 typically maintained the social standing to which they were born, while the other 3 would "slip down the social scale, usually only a few rungs, but the decline was unmistakable and often cumulative over the generations." (5). When it comes to social mobility, Muir notes that most historians (and I would argue, most Regency romance writers) tend to focus on "the absorption of new blood and new money and the resistance it encountered, rather than the simultaneous decline of the younger branches of almost every great family" (5).
An excellent resource, especially for those who wish to write male protagonists who are not aristocrats or land owners.
Younger sons could maintain their status by inheriting a fortune from a friend or more distant family member (such legacies typically went to the 2nd son); by marrying an heiress; or by pursuing a career. As heiresses and fortunes were far from common, most younger gentry sons pursued the third option. As most of us are likely aware, the professions that one could pursue and still maintain the title "gentleman" were limited:
The Church
The Law
The Navy
The Army
Banking
Overseas trade
Other branches of commerce (but not manufacturing or retail)
Government service
Colonizing
And, more rarely, Medicine
The second chapter focuses on money, and how much of it one needed in order to support oneself, and a family, if one wished to be regarded as genteel.
The average income of knights and squires in the period: £1,500
The average income of a gentleman of private means: £700
The average income of a baronet: £3,000
The average income of a peer: £8,000
A family could hardly maintain the appearance of gentility on anything less than £300; a single man on £150-200.
An income of £1,000 could support a genteel family of husband, wife, and three children, allowing them 3 female servants, a coachman, a footman, a carriage, and a pair of horses, leaving £100 for unexpected expenses.
An income of £1,500 would give the family above two additional servants (a maid and a groom), a gig or other small, light two-wheeler as well as a large carriage, and a third horse. They would also eat better.
An income of £2,000 would allow the same family 10 servants, 2 carriages, and five horses, and to spend more on provisions.
Given that one needed a fortune of £40,000 to secure an annual income of £2,000 a year, a younger son would have to not just do well but excel in his career in order to gain this high level of social status.
Chapters 3-12 each focus on a different profession, detailing what level of social status drew the most younger sons to the profession; how one broke into the field; what qualifications were required (or were not); what one's family had to pay (in money or connections/patronage) to find a son a place; how long families had to support their sons while they established themselves in a profession; what a typical career in that profession was like; how one advanced in it; what one typically earned; how that profession rated in terms of gentility; the benefits and drawbacks to such a career; and a wealth of examples of actual men who succeeded and fared poorly in each.
Fascinating fact: a genteel family had on average 5-6 children who survived to adulthood, but only 3 typically maintained the social standing to which they were born, while the other 3 would "slip down the social scale, usually only a few rungs, but the decline was unmistakable and often cumulative over the generations." (5). When it comes to social mobility, Muir notes that most historians (and I would argue, most Regency romance writers) tend to focus on "the absorption of new blood and new money and the resistance it encountered, rather than the simultaneous decline of the younger branches of almost every great family" (5).
An excellent resource, especially for those who wish to write male protagonists who are not aristocrats or land owners.
tahlia__nerds_out's review against another edition
medium-paced
4.0
This Yale University Press publication is one that I have mixed feelings about. On the one hand, the pacing can be a bit slow at times and I found my mind wandering at points. This may be due to a more academic style; though I like academic history books, this kind of style does not always make for quick reading. I did not find this to be a fatal flaw within the book, however, as there were many times where I was very much invested in the book. One of the ways the author chose to convey information was through examples through the lived experience of specific men of the era. This was a very effective technique for making what could have been a very dry and abstract book into something more concrete and personal. I became invested in the stories of these men and found myself wanting to know more about certain ones that he referenced… to the point that I actually did pick up the autobiography of one of them (Sir Harry Smith).
This was the book’s strong suit, although the footnotes could also be quite interesting at times. I recommend not missing out on them, as might often be the temptation. This does slow down one’s reading, but the footnotes did contain certain tidbits that were not mentioned in the main text that were nonetheless rather interesting.
While this might not be a book that I will frequently reread, I could possibly see myself rereading it in the future, if only to revisit some of the men to whom this book gives a voice. To any lover of Jane Austen, this book is a must-read. It makes more clear some important things that the contemporary reader of Jane Austen would have known automatically, but that the modern reader might otherwise miss. We learn why Edward Ferrars might not have been expected to be able to marry immediately upon taking orders and why it seemed so odd to Mary Crawford that Edmund Bertram should choose to be present at his parish instead of decamping to London. Lady Russell’s objection to Anne Elliot’s romance with Captain Wentworth in their youth also becomes more understandable and makes the character’s objection seem less classist than it otherwise does to a modern reader.
I learned a lot from this book and heard the stories of a lot of men whose stories deserved to be told. For that, I would rate this book 4 out of 5 stars.