Calling Jane Austen experts...

[Zee]

I've read all of Austen's books except Emma, which I'm almost through with. In several of her other books, the heroines are often distressed about making good financial matches because women did not inherit their father's estates in those days. So even if the father had a little money or property, it would all go to the next male relative if there were no sons to retain it. At least that's how I understand it. But in Emma it is stated that she will receive 30,000 pounds per year. I realize she is very wealthy, but she has no brothers, so why would she receive the money? Is that only if her father is living? She has no plans to marry for much of the book, so she doesn't seem to have the same worry about losing everything if her father dies that the other heroines have. There's something I'm not understanding. Anyone care to set me straight? :lurk5:

[Melenie]

NM

Edited October 26, 2010 by Melenie

[Wendi]

Some estates are "entailed", meaning for generations after, the property only goes to the nearest male relative. (That's why Mrs. Bennett is so obsessed with marrying off her daughters; when Mr. Bennett dies, Mr. Collins inherits. Apparently the Woodhouses' property is not entailed, so Emma and/or Isabella inherits.) The money, though, may be a separate thing than inheriting a house or estate. In other words, if Mr. Bennett had any substantial money, his daughters could inherit that, I believe, but just not the actual home and property - Longbourne itself. I think.

 

Wendi

[Laura Corin]

It depends on a) what the father's will says (Sense and Sensibility) or b) whether the property is entailed by previous legal documentation to descend through the male line only (Pride and Prejudice). In the case of Emma, presumably there is no entail and her father dotes on her so she* can inherit the lot. At least that's my understanding.

 

*ETA: and presumably her sister

 

Laura

Edited October 26, 2010 by Laura Corin

[lionfamily1999]

It depends on a) what the father's will says (Sense and Sensibility) or b) whether the property is entailed by previous legal documentation to descend through the male line only (Pride and Prejudice). In the case of Emma, presumably there is no entail and her father dotes on her so she can inherit the lot. At least that's my understanding.

 

Laura

:iagree:

[forty-two]

Also, my understanding is that often the daughters inherited whatever money their mothers brought into the marriage. Like in P&P, I think they each were getting their share of 1,000 pounds, which I'm pretty sure was from *Mrs* Bennet. So maybe Emma's mom had a good-sized fortune, and since Emma is the only child, she gets all of it.

 

ETA: Correction (thanks to the poster below): Emma has a sister, so it only has to be split two ways.

Edited October 26, 2010 by forty-two
I'm an idiot ;)

[Wendi]

Also, my understanding is that often the daughters inherited whatever money their mothers brought into the marriage. Like in P&P, I think they each were getting their share of 1,000 pounds, which I'm pretty sure was from *Mrs* Bennet. So maybe Emma's mom had a good-sized fortune, and since Emma is the only child, she gets all of it.

 

Emma's not an only child. Her sister, Isabella, is married to Mr. John Knightley, brother of our hero, Mr. George Knightley. (I was Miss Bates in a production of Emma recently.)

 

Wendi

[forty-two]

Emma's not an only child. Her sister, Isabella, is married to Mr. John Knightley, brother of our hero, Mr. George Knightley. (I was Miss Bates in a production of Emma recently.)

 

Wendi

Well, now I feel stupid :tongue_smilie: - completely forgot about her. Can you tell that Emma is one of my less favorite JA novels ;). Well, then her mom must have had a *big* fortune, if Emma's share is 30,000. Possible, I think, since Mary King in P&P had 50,000 - 60,000 isn't *too* much more.

[dangermom]

Some estates are "entailed", meaning for generations after, the property only goes to the nearest male relative. (That's why Mrs. Bennett is so obsessed with marrying off her daughters; when Mr. Bennett dies, Mr. Collins inherits. Apparently the Woodhouses' property is not entailed, so Emma and/or Isabella inherits.) The money, though, may be a separate thing than inheriting a house or estate. In other words, if Mr. Bennett had any substantial money, his daughters could inherit that, I believe, but just not the actual home and property - Longbourne itself. I think.

 

Wendi

That depends where the money comes from. Most of the time, the income is coming from the property--it's the proceeds from rents. The Bennetts have never saved anything, so all Mr. Bennett's income is from the property, and Mrs. Bennett has a teeny little annuity, IIRC.

 

Mr. Darcy's huge wealth comes from his property, and then his sister has had money settled on her; her father set aside 30,000 pounds or whatever it was for her to keep (in the bank at 4% interest, which she can live on). I believe Emma has this settlement as well.

[Rivka]

It comes down in large part to where the family's wealth comes from. If it comes purely from land/rents, and the property is entailed to keep it within the male line, then the daughters are indeed out of luck. But if some or all of the family's wealth is in actual money (invested in the Funds, for example), or in lands that are not tied up in an entail, it can be disposed of as they please.

 

Also, if Mr. Bennett had been able to scrape up the money, he could have bought additional land, which he then would have been perfectly able to pass on to his daughters. The entail only applies to the land he inherited from his father - and again, only because his father had set up an entail.

[Mom in High Heels]

That depends where the money comes from. Most of the time, the income is coming from the property--it's the proceeds from rents. The Bennetts have never saved anything, so all Mr. Bennett's income is from the property, and Mrs. Bennett has a teeny little annuity, IIRC.

 

Mr. Darcy's huge wealth comes from his property, and then his sister has had money settled on her; her father set aside 30,000 pounds or whatever it was for her to keep (in the bank at 4% interest, which she can live on). I believe Emma has this settlement as well.

 

Yes, this. Many properties were entailed in their granting, but money from the estates can be set aside for daughters if the patents chose to do so. For Emma's father, he had only 2 girls, and he was quite wealthy. Setting aside money (including money that came from the mother) wouldn't be that big a deal.

 

The Bennet's were not wealthy (though they had plenty of land and enough to afford servants) and had 5 daughters to provide for. The mother was quite flighty and the father rather neglectful, so perhaps they never thought to put money aside for the girls. Perhaps their estate was poorly managed (rents too low, tenants who didn't pay, poor harvest, low prices for wool or whatever they produced) or they simply spent more than they made, which seems the more likely scenario given the characters.

 

In S&S, the estate was entailed on the son, but the widow received a small portion to live on. The father could probably have settled some money on the daughters but assumed his son would take care of them. Hah! This is probably why many gentry women ended up as paid companions or nannies to wealthier family members.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

It depends on a) what the father's will says (Sense and Sensibility) or b) whether the property is entailed by previous legal documentation to descend through the male line only (Pride and Prejudice). In the case of Emma, presumably there is no entail and her father dotes on her so she* can inherit the lot. At least that's my understanding.

 

*ETA: and presumably her sister

 

Laura

 

If I remember correctly in S&S, the three daughters are from a second marriage. The son receives the bulk of the estate with the expectation that he is going to take care of his half sisters. There is a scene where the son's wife (Fanny?) talks him down from a generours share to one that is very miserly.

 

I think the purpose of entailments was to keep a property intact rather than being subdivided over and over.

 

And you also read of a family that has property but no longer the means to keep them up or to keep up their standard of living. In Perssuasion, the father has had no sense of economy and has spent his sizable fortune into a hole. I think the idea behind going away to Bath and renting out the estate might have been to allow the rents from the house and the tenants to catch up while he was in a place where he could be a big fish in a small pond and perhaps had less need of spending money (for example, they had fewer servants and got rid of their horses). His estate was also entailed (if I'm remembering correctly) and that was the reason for the plot about the cousin who was a scalliwag and was wooing Anne for a time.

[Zee]

Thanks, everybody! I knew I could rely on your collective knowledge. Now it makes sense to me. Hooray! I can finish my final Jane Austen book with peace in my mind. :) The only bad thing is that it is, indeed, the last of her novels. :(

 

 

Thanks again!!

[dangermom]

The Bennet's were not wealthy (though they had plenty of land and enough to afford servants) and had 5 daughters to provide for. The mother was quite flighty and the father rather neglectful, so perhaps they never thought to put money aside for the girls. Perhaps their estate was poorly managed (rents too low, tenants who didn't pay, poor harvest, low prices for wool or whatever they produced) or they simply spent more than they made, which seems the more likely scenario given the characters.

 

IIRC, they were planning to have a son, so they didn't need to save. Then by the time they figured out they weren't going to get a son, they figured it was too late to start saving. And you know Mrs. Bennet would spend every penny of their income, if not more. Yep, bad management.

[Rosie_0801]

Thanks, everybody! I knew I could rely on your collective knowledge. Now it makes sense to me. Hooray! I can finish my final Jane Austen book with peace in my mind. :) The only bad thing is that it is, indeed, the last of her novels. :(

 

There is another that she didn't finish and someone else did. I think they did a very good job of it. I couldn't tell where Jane left off and the next author picked up. What's it called? I'll look it up... Ah yes, "Sanditon."

 

Rosie

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Thanks, everybody! I knew I could rely on your collective knowledge. Now it makes sense to me. Hooray! I can finish my final Jane Austen book with peace in my mind. :) The only bad thing is that it is, indeed, the last of her novels. :(

 

 

Thanks again!!

 

I know the feeling of reading the last book. I was so disheartened to read the last Hornblower years ago. Then I discovered one that had escaped me. I'm actually saving it to savor when I am in the hospital with some horrible problem. (Yeah, I'm that weird.)

 

The good news is that you still have Edith Wharton and Patrick O'Brian and Dorothy Sayers and Ellis Peters . . . And because you know you can read and enjoy a book with some depth these other great stories won't scare you off.

[Zee]

I'll add this to my list. Thanks. :)

[Zee]

I've read Ethan Frome and The Age of Innocence before (LOVED them both), but may need to look into the other works by Wharton. I haven't read anything by the other authors. I'll have to check my library. Most of my print reading is school related. My "fun reading" is usually audiobooks in the car, because there just isn't enough time to read all that I would like to these days, and I'm in the car a lot. Thanks for the suggestions. :)

[TXMomof4]

I just have to say - this thread made me laugh!

 

How do so many of you know so much about inheiriting property in England in the 1800s(?). I never fail to be amazed at the knowledge that this board has! I love it!

[TXMomof4]

I've read Ethan Frome and The Age of Innocence before (LOVED them both), but may need to look into the other works by Wharton. I haven't read anything by the other authors. I'll have to check my library. Most of my print reading is school related. My "fun reading" is usually audiobooks in the car, because there just isn't enough time to read all that I would like to these days, and I'm in the car a lot. Thanks for the suggestions. :)

 

I really enjoyed some of Edith Wharton's - House of Mirth was good.

 

Look at Thomas Hardy as well. Tess of D'Ubervilles was certainly NOT his best book in my opinion. Not even close. Far from the Madding Crowd was fantastic, The Woodlanders, Mayor of Casterbridge, Jude the Obscure, Return of the Native - there are a bunch of them and I really, really liked them.

 

George Eliot was a little harder to read, but there were a few that I loved as well. Mill on the Floss was probably my favorite of his - I'm reading Silas Marner right now.

 

My kindle has paid for itself many times over - all of these books were available for free! I never would have found them on the dollar shelf at Half Price Books, I'm sure!

[Zee]

O.k., I'll add these to the list, too. :)

Thanks.

[Mrs Mungo]

If I remember correctly in S&S, the three daughters are from a second marriage. The son receives the bulk of the estate with the expectation that he is going to take care of his half sisters. There is a scene where the son's wife (Fanny?) talks him down from a generours share to one that is very miserly.

 

S&S is actually about the second wife and her two daughters.

 

Other than that, i pretty much agree with what's already been said.

 

I know the feeling of reading the last book. I was so disheartened to read the last Hornblower years ago. Then I discovered one that had escaped me. I'm actually saving it to savor when I am in the hospital with some horrible problem. (Yeah, I'm that weird.)

 

What? Which Hornblower book did you miss (did I miss it?!)?

 

The good news is that you still have Edith Wharton and Patrick O'Brian and Dorothy Sayers and Ellis Peters . . . And because you know you can read and enjoy a book with some depth these other great stories won't scare you off.

 

:iagree: There are lots of good authors out there to discover.

[shanvan]

Maria Edgeworth writes very much like Austen with somewhat similar themes. I enjoyed her books as much as Austen's. Helen and Belinda were excellent. You will never find them in bookstores. They have to be ordered. There are also some writers who try to pick up where JA left off, or add to some of JA's novels. One of the best writers doing this is Joan Aiken who has written

 

 

 

 

• Mansfield Revisited (1984)
  
• Jane Fairfax (The Story of the Second Heroine in Jane Austen's Emma) (1990)
  
• Eliza’s Daughter (1994)
  
• Emma Watson: The Watsons Completed (1996)
  
• The Youngest Miss Ward (1998)
  
• Lady Catherine's Necklace (2000)
  
  

 

I just have to add that George Eliot was a woman named Mary Anne Evans. She used a pen name.

 

Shannon

[Laura Corin]

S&S is actually about the second wife and her two daughters.

 

Margaret is not grown up.

 

Laura