Back to Top

Category: Research

Posts in which we talk about research

Believe it or not, that’s the actual title of a book published in 1824. There are at least three remarkable things about this book.

First, allow me to share the title page with you.

WINE AND WALNUTS ;
OR
after Dinner Chit Chat
BY
EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE

CITIZEN AND DRY SALTER

SECOND EDITION
IN TWO VOLUMES
VOL I
LONDON
PRINTED FOB LONGMAN HURST REES OEME BROWN AND
GREEN
PATERNOSTER ROW
1824

Chit Chat.I don’t think I knew chit chat was period.

But this: this kills me: Citizen and Dry Salter.

You OWN it Ephraim! Is it just me, or does that strike you as highly amusing?

More Words

If ever a man possessed a particular bent of mind from some inherent feeling I verily believe I may claim credence on asserting that I have experienced such an extraordinary faculty. But lest the assumption may appear proudly egotistical— nay savour too strongly of vanity, in this modest age be it known that my pretensions to notoriety for this singular gift are but on an humble score being neither more nor less than for possessing an inherent love for the PICTURESQUE. Now having said this much I will endeavour to show how this marvellous faculty had birth– call me egotist if it be your pleasure, for I am of the old school, and save a world of circumlocution…

Now, I would have sworn that ego-anything was not period. But apparently it is. And yet, if I had a heroine call someone an egotist, everyone would think of Freud.

Translation please?

And now, what the hell is this guy saying? My brain got all twisted up about ten words in. Allow me to translate:

I feel things more than most, and it’s gone all up in my brain and made me super smart. I’m serious. Not that I’m not vain or anything. Not compared to some of the blowhards these days. Everyone who knows me knows I’m smarter than any of those dodos from Oxford. Here’s my secret; I like pretty things. True statement. Now, listen up, because that’s why you’ll LOVE my stories. I am older than you. Hell, I’m older than your father. I know things you young hipsters don’t.

And that, my friends, took a LOT longer than I expected. That guy’s been in the wine. But then, as he goes on to say. He’s eighty years old.

I may just translate the whole damn book. This guy is funny.

From that nut, Ephraim Hardcastle of Walnuts and Wine

It is yet a maxim with some remnants of the old school of curmudgeon ledger-men, that to buy a picture is to “hang your money on the wall.” The same narrow notions applied to books — “What, lock your money up in calfskins!”

Editorial note: 1820: Calfskin. 2013: my iPad. I wonder what Mr. Hardcastle would say about that?

The stock of literature, with those who accumulated stock, besides the Holy Bible, usually consisted of John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress, the same lively writer’s Holy War, Fox’s Book of Martyrs, the Old Whole Duty of Man, a mutilated Baker’s Chronicle, some odd volumes of Jacob Tonson’s duodecimo Spectator, and Herman Moll’s Geography, commonly with torn maps, the Tale of a Tub, Milton’s Paradise Lost (never read), Culpepper’s Herbal, or Every Man his own Physician (the good lady’s book, under lock and key), the Complete Letter Writer, belonging to Miss, with Robinson Crusoe, Robin Hood’s Garland, and the Seven Champions of Christendom, the property of Jem and Jack.

Yes, gentle reader, reading has made a wonderful revolution in manners: every pretty miss can name the stars; and Newton, Descartes, and Tycho Brahe, are known to have been neither Egyptian, Roman, nor Greek; and the boys and girls may account for an eclipse, without being checked by papa with, “Such things are presumptuous, child.” In short, your magazinists and reviewists, your essayists and journalists, have brought your book-makers into vogue, until, such are the fruits of this scribbling era, “we philosophers, poets, and wits,” as a learned friend of mine has said, “no longer make a stir as heretofore in a party, like unto a stone, that, thrown into quiet water, maketh a disturbed circle from bank to bank:”—-no, “we make our entrance and our exit much like other harmless folks:” and this! in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and twenty! —” So runs the world away.”

All-righty! Reading is GOOD for you. Even if it does mean pretty girls can name the stars.

He says that almost like it’s a bad thing. Or so ironically cute. Look at the pretty girl, naming the stars like she’s not going to be popping ’em out like kittens pretty soon.

I have my curmudgeonly moments, and this is one of them.

Watch this Segue

I feel it’s only appropriate to follow that with this, taken from the front matter of an 1825 book on boxing, since, it turns out The Next Historical requires that I know something about Regency era boxing:

THE KNIGHT, THE DAEMON, AND THE ROBBER CHIEF.
A Romance. Price 6s.

THE ACTOR’S BUDGET.
In Two elegant Volumes, 12mo. Price 12s. Boards
By W. OXBERRY,
Of the Drury-Lane Company of Comedians.

In a few Days will be Published.

THE EVE OF SAN MARCO.
A Romance. In Three Volumes, Price 18s. Boards.

THE SPRITE AND THE LADY; OR, REMEMBER TWELVE!!
In Four Volumes, Price 1L. 1s. Boards.
By W. G. Thomas, Esq.

And so, we see that Romance is cheap. Alas, THE KNIGHT, THE DAEMON, AND THE ROBBER CHIEF, while listed in several Circulating Library catalogs, does not seem to be in Google Books. I found The Actor’s Budget. My God. That’s all I’ll say. The Eve of San Marco isn’t in Google books and neither is The Sprite and the Lady and the 12 whatever’s we ought not to forget. It’s MUCH more expensive that the daemon book. Interesting that it doesn’t say it’s in boards. Wonder why not? It’s their LEAD title!

I’m finishing up The Next Historical and as it turns out there’s boxing in this story. Which, to be honest, I should have known all along. First off, Bracebridge (the man who loved and lost Anne in Lord Ruin) was a man with a history of brawling as a young man. Thale, who also appeared in Lord Ruin, boxes and was often bruised as a result. [Insert author waffling about stuff] and so! There is boxing in this book.

Here’s the sum total of my boxing knowledge:

  1. Mohammed Ali was The Greatest
  2. Dolph Lundgren in Rocky was SMOKING hot.
  3. Rope-A-Dope
  4. Float like a Butterfly
  5. Mike Tyson bit off someone’s ear
  6. THE boxing establishment in the Regency was Gentleman Jack’s and men went there and did … boxing.
  7. My first Georgette Heyer ever was Regency Rake, which has the hero at some kind of boxing thingee.
  8. Sugar Ray Leonard: also SMOKING hot. And best nickname ever.

Even I know that’s not enough to inform a book.

To Google Books Advanced Search, Robin!

Yes, I am batman in this analogy. But awesomer.

Here’s a few things I’ve learned so far, subject to confirmation.

The actual fighting in boxing matches were referred to as battles. The men who boxed professionally were strong and fit. Some of them tremendously so. There were several Jewish boxers, referred to in terms we now find offensive. Many of the men weren’t particularly tall. Not so surprising since they came from the laboring class and, one presumes, were probably less likely to have the kind of nutrition and health that would put calories toward growing tall.

Not everyone agreed that pugilism was The Best Thing Ever. Witness these comments:

Arguments Upon Boxing Or Pugilism: Which Will Always be Proper for Perusal, So Long as the Brutal Practice of Boxing Shall Continue; But More Especially Applicable Now, as the Subject Has Just Been Discussed at the British Forum, No. 22, Piccadilly

William P. Russel

Yet in contempt of all law the brutal custom of pugilism is daily practised amongst us Even the magistracy itself is openly insulted by the previous notice of these murderous combats which is given in the public newspapers the editors of which by disgracing their columns with a disgusting minuteness of detail after the battle is over give a lamentable proof of their own vitiated taste and feelings and thus prostitute the liberty of the press to the great injury of the public morals Pugilism is a science which might have been very suitably displayed in a Roman amphitheatre before an assemblage of Heathen spectators but is surely a disgraceful practice in a christian country. The laws no doubt are sufficient to restrain these daring offenders against public order were there not a culpable remissness in enforcing them.
Footnote: The magistrates of the county of Cambridge very laudably passed certain resolutions at the last Christmas quarter sessions to prevent the disgraceful practice of prize fighting. Mr justice Grose in his charge to the grand jury at the last Lent assizes highly commended their conduct and called upon the public in general to assist them in their endeavours and observed that if after such notice any persons should abet such practices they would on conviction be liable to twelve months imprisonment.
Cambridge Chronicle March 19th 1808

A Concise View of the Constitution of England
By George Custance

Let no one however imagine that Pugilism has no influence upon courage. It is my firm belief that true courage is destroyed and a bastard feeling substituted by the Science of Defence. I do not mean to say that Pugilists are not daring and fearless, that they are not reckless of all personal danger but I assert that in them unsophisticated manhood is despoiled. True courage will always show itself in its exercise while it will invariably fly to the aid of the innocent and the injured it will never wantonly attack the defenceless. It is and must be otherwise with Boxers. Like that of a butcher it is the trade of a Pugilist to become ferocious.

Remarks on The Influence of Pugilism on Morals, Being the Substance of a Speech Delivered at the NEWCASTLE DEBATING SOCIETY on the Fourth of November 1824 BY WILLIAM VASEY

Keeping that in mind, here’s this:

This last method, much to our disgrace, is but too generally resorted to by the inhabitants of some of the counties in England, but boxing is there an art neither known nor understood; and, it is a singular and striking fact, that in every part of this kingdom where the manly system of pugilism is not practised, all personal disputes are decided by the exertion of a savage ferocity; and a fondness for barbarous sports is found predominantly to prevail.
Having then shewn, beyond the power of refutation, the superiority of Pugilism, and how strongly it stands entitled to advancement, in order to foster manly fortitude and vigour, can it possibly be doubted but that by the introduction of such a system, and the laws of honour by which it is regulated, the life of man would be more respected, barbarous propensities subdued, and our character rescued from the stigma of savage rudeness.

Pancratia, or, A history of pugilism

It is from such open and manly contests in England, my Lord, that the desperate and fatal effects of human passion are in a great measure, if not totally, prevented; the use of the poisonous draught shuddered at; secret revenge found to have no lurking place in the breast of a Briton; and the application of the dagger abhorred.

Boxiana: During the championship of Cribb, to Spring’s challenge to all England, by Pierce Egan

Suffice it to say, every period book (so far) on the subject goes to great pains to explain why boxing was wonderful despite the fact that it’s fighting. Which suggests to me several things; there were VERY strong opinions on the subject. The fact that there were laws against the practice suggests that the Boxing camp felt defensive– over and above the usual prose you see of the time. Because back then, you didn’t just say porridge was good for you. You had to write a treatise on the benefits porridge!

Yet, the laws were loosely enforced, and surely the sport’s popularity with the upper class is a reason. One account mentions how one of the combatants in a match disrupted by the authorities was taken up and heavily implied it was a disgrace that he wasn’t bailed out sooner than he was. From that, I deduce there was a code of honor; one did not let a boxer cool his heels in the hoosegow. If you had money, you bailed him out. That, too, stands to reason. You’re not going to get men to box professionally with that sort of risk.

Boxing was heavily class-ist. The great boxers weren’t noblemen, after all, they were men who labored. There are hints of gentlemen (“amateurs”) who fought at matches, but I’ve not (yet) found an account in which such as match is described blow-by-blow (literally, sometimes). There was also big money: From 10 pounds to over 1,000. The matches I’ve seen described, which were no doubt the ones worth recording, commonly had quite large stakes. The winner usually took 2/3’s, the loser the rest.

Very interesting reading.

The Difference between Historical Images and Images of Things that are Historical.

I have a bit of both for you in this post.

Perhaps the biggest news in images for those doing research is the British Library’s Flickr Account which contains  1 Million Photos released into the public domain.

If you’d like to read more about this effort with Microsoft, this blog post explains it pretty well (Read the whole post. It’s not long, though there are lots of images.) Then say thank you to the British Library and Microsoft. Yahoo, too, because that’s a lot of images hosted on Yahoo webspace.

We have released over a million images onto Flickr Commons for anyone to use, remix and repurpose. These images were taken from the pages of 17th, 18th and 19th century books digitised by Microsoft who then generously gifted the scanned images to us, allowing us to release them back into the Public Domain.

Make sure you check out the Sets tab for things like this:

Fashion

A great resource. Tag if you can!

Images of Historical Things

The British Library released actual historical images. Now we move to the other category, though I focus on Pinterest.

Here are links to some of my Pinterest boards. Note that I am not so great at Pinterest. I’m working at it though. I’m slowly remembering to pin things and now I need to get better at following boards that have done amazing work with creating collections of images.

Historical Stuff – slowly building.

Regency Era prints — Don’t get excited, I have only a few here.

A Board that is Awesome

Cassidy – This one is organized by year or range of years, and has historical fashion for just about every era. But there’s more! There are also boards by clothing type like this one: Headwear 1800-1819

Candice Hern’s Regency World

Of course no discussion of Regency era images can possibly be complete without pointing you all in the direction of Candice Hern’s Regency World. An amazing author and a serious collector. This is a place to spend some time. Lots of time. What I love about her site (everything?) is that it’s dedicated to the Regency, and it’s meticulous about dates and provenance. Not to mention the fact that it’s not just clothes but the kinds of things people used and carried with them.

As I close in on finishing The Next Historical, I’m also researching as much as I can about pugilism. As so often happens, one gets on a tangent … this one was fruitful but a bit macabre. In 1820, a Mr. Thurtell and confederates were involved in the murder of one William Weare. The events were, it would seem, fairly infamous. In 1824 there appeared The Fatal Effects of Gambling Exemplified in the Murder of Wm. Weare which relates, in a frustratingly circuitous manner, the events of that evening, the days leading up it and the aftermath.

Yes, it’s early True Crime. The title of the work should clue you in on any personal biases of the author.

At any rate, I have gained some new-to-me Regency vocabulary and a sense that some people are just … not … good.

Here’s the gist of what happened: A Mr. Thurtell was out with some compatriots (Weare and Hunt. One Probert appears to have at least known them) and in the wee hours of the morning one of them, William Weare, had been shot in the head and his body dumped in Probert’s pond. Probert (only Hunt and Thurtell were tried) objected to the body dumping and so the corpse was moved to a different pond. As an aside, at trial, Thurtell, who represented himself, expressly identified the property owner Mr. Probert as the likely murderer. The suspects were observed after the fact looking for items lost and when asked, claimed to have been in an carriage accident that did not result in the carriage tipping over or any injury to man or horse, but did result in the loss of personal effects. The clothing of Mr. Thurtell was found to be bloodstained.

And now, I’m going to pull out bits of some of the narrative.

Among other anecdotes which he [Thurtell] related of himself, were the two following : He was in the neighbourhood of Cheltenham some time ago with a noted boxer, and some of the visitants and inhabitants made a match between two men, and considerable bets were pending. He, himself, made bets to the amount of £200 on the worst man, and he and his boxing friend by acting, the one as second, and the other as time-keeper contrived to make the worst man win the battle; and so, as he said, the Cheltenham yokels were nick’d, and he carried off the £200.

He [Thurtell] was with the English at the storming of St. Sebastian, and when they entered the town, he saw a Polish officer in the French service, leaning against the wall, “seemingly done up with wounds and hard work. I thought by the look of him,” he continued, “that he was a nob, and must have some blunt about him–so I just stuck my sword in his rib; and settled him; and I found a hundred and forty doubloons in the pocket!–a good booty, wasn’t it, Joe?

Thurtell was known among his flash friends by the nick-name of “Old Flare.” He was always remarkably reserved and thoughtful in company. He would sit for hours and scarcely speak. When he did speak, his conversation was of the most hardened and disgusting kind, and his general conduct was such, that two of his worthy companions made a bet of a dozen of wine, that he would be hanged within three years.

In other research that branched off from here, the attendees of an infamous trial had trouble finding rooms. In the town where the trial was taking place. Two weeks before the trial, the going rate was “5 guineas for 2 bedchambers and a sitting room” and after that there were “… no rooms to be had.”

At the trial, a witness said:

I observed the chaise in which Thurtell was, merely because of its being on the wrong side of the road.

And this answers a point I’ve often wondered about. It seems OBVIOUS that traffic could not been unregulated enough that you could drive any which way. There just had to be formal or at least generally accepted traffic rules. So here, yes, that chaise was on the wrong side of the road.

Another interesting linguistic fact is the reference to distance in “poles” as in the gate was about thirty poles from Probert’s cottage. This measurement is referenced many times in this account. Wikipedia is of some assistance:

The rod or perch or pole is a surveyors tool and unit of length equal to 5½ yards, 16½ feet or 1/320th of a statute mile and one-fourth of a surveyors chain. The rod is useful as a unit of length because whole number multiples of it can equal one acre of square measure. […] Since the adoption of the international yard on 1 July 1959, the rod has been equal to exactly 5.0292 meters.

A rod is the same length as a perch also sometimes called a pole which measure using cordage or wood, slightly antedated the use of both rods and surveyors chains, made of more dimensionally regular materials. The measure also has a relationship to the military pike of about the same size and both measures date from the sixteenth century when that weapon was still utilized in national armies. Wikipedia

It is stated that a plan had been organized by a gang, at the head of which were Thurtell, Hunt, and Probert, by which the lives of all persons, who were either obnoxious to the parties, or whose deaths would lead to the possession of property, were to be sacrificed. Manchester-buildings, Cannon-row, Westminster, was chosen for the scene of those dreadful doings; and considering the vicinity of the river, and the facility thence afforded of floating the bodies of their victims downward to the ocean, the situation was but too well adapted for the purpose. A house in Manchester-buildings was taken under the pretence of Thurtell’s carrying on there his old occupation of a bombasin merchant, but it was wholly without furniture; and whoever considers the situation must be convinced that a wholesale warehouse there was entirely out of the question. It could be taken for no other purposes than those of robbery and murder; and there is little doubt that this more sequestered spot was selected for both. It does not, however, appear that any person has fallen a victim to this diabolical scheme, although a Mr. Woods has had a very narrow escape, as will appear from the following statement:

On the morning of Monday, October 7th, about a quarter before seven o’clock, a man, habited as a journeyman carpenter, about five feet eight or nine inches high, of dark complexion, and with large black whiskers, called at Mr. Woods’ residence, and stated that a lady of the name of Brew, with whom Mr. W. was well acquainted, was desirous of seeing him upon some important business, at a house in a street in Westminster, the name of which he did not know, but it was a street just beyond the Horse-Guards. Mr. Woods was not satisfied with the account, and questioned him as to the cause of Mrs. Brew being in Westminster, as she resided at Kensington. His answer was, that she was stopping at a friend’s house, and wished to see Mr. W. that morning as she was going out of town. Upon this, Mr. Woods accompanied him to Manchester Buildings, where he stopped at No. 10, which Mr. W. immediately saw was an uninhabited house. The door being ajar, his suspicions were awakened that all was not correct, and he desired the man to step in, and tell Mrs. Brew that he (Mr. W ) was there. The man entered, and having proceeded along the hall or passage as Jar as the back-parlour door, Mr. Woods saw John Thurtell spring from the back-parlour and strike the man a heavy blow, which knocked him with great violence against the opposite wall. The man hallooed out something which Mr. Woods did not distinctly understand, but to the effect that Thurtell had mistaken his man. Mr. W. immediately retired, and, on looking back from the end of the street, he saw the messenger at the door of the house gazing after him, but not attempting any pursuit. Upon this Mr. W. waited on the son of Mrs. Brew, and was informed by him that that lady had been for three weeks in the Isle of Man. What follows is very mysterious. On his return home, he found the following letter, which had been left at his residence by a man of shabby appearance, almost immediately on his quitting the house with the messenger.
An unknown friend informs you that there is a writ cut against you for £10. ; keep out of the way till after Friday next.

In the evening of the same day he received the following letter also:—
Sir, Monday Afternoon, Four o’Clock.
I am happy to inform you, that an unknown friend of yours [has?] settled the action, which you were about to be arrested for this morning for £10 and costs; therefore you have no aeration to make yourself uneasy about it. I understand – you are; indebted to a Mr. Cozens for his interference in this ungentlemanly act. I am, Sir, yours,
Clifford’s-Inn. Clarke.

The inference drawn from this statement was that the first note was for the purpose of preventing any inquiry after Mr. Wood, had his intended assassination been carried into effect, until sufficient time had elapsed for his body to have been effectually disposed of.

Some conclusionary Remarks

After spending considerable time relating how awful Thurtell was, the tone switches entirely. Thurtell was sentenced to death, with his body to be given afterwards to surgeons for dissection. And now, he’s a heroic soul meeting his fate as only a gentleman can.

Next week, if it seems fitting, I’ll post about some of the Evils of Gambling and the French. They seem to get blamed a lot.

Follow
Get every new post delivered to your inbox
Join millions of other followers
Powered By WPFruits.com