# Romance from days gone by



## grahamg (Feb 25, 2017)

In the 'days of empire' this is the way things were done between courting couples according to their correspondence:

https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/bitstream/handle/10036/3643/FieldingM.pdf?sequence=1


"Thomas Rawlinson, as he portrayed himself in his seventeen letters to Hannah Satterthwaite between February and June 1776, was an energetically romantic man eager to express his passion, praise Hannah’s qualities and question his own worthiness of her appreciation.

He presents himself as a man of sensibility with extravagant epistolary sentiment and self-conscious health anxieties. In letter after letter, he expresses adoration of Hannah in the hyperbolic language characteristic of fiction, writing guides and conduct literature. For example: 

I can believe myself the happiest Man on Earth when those transporting words with which you conclude are wrote by One for whom I entertain the most exquisite feelings of affection address’d to myself. Oh, lovely Charmer, I scarce knew what it was to love before. I find so many new pleasures rush upon my soul, that I can neither speak or think but you and your inestimable Beauties are the Subject – and I cannot forebear crying out to Heaven that it is too bountifull towards so undeserving a Creature. 
 
Comparable expressions of passion can be found in many sources including the following from the much later 
_
New Guide to Matrimony_: 
There is now no minute of my Life that does not afford me some new Argument how much I love you. The little Joy I take in every Thing wherein you are not concerned; the pleasing Perplexity of the endless Thought which I fall into, wherever you Are brought to my Remembrance; and, lastly, the continual Disquiet I am in, during your Absence, convince me that I do not do you Justice in loving you, so as Woman was never loved before.
 
In the absence of further explanation, the origins of Rawlinson’s epistolary style remain a mystery but phrases like "lovely Charmer" and "your inestimable Beauties" could have been found in fiction or writing guides. He may, though, have managed without published exemplars: he had four older sisters and 116 numerous female cousins as well as olderbrothers who might instruct him in the art of getting a wife. On the surface, Rawlinson is a man captivated by love but he is also conscious that his correspondence might have a wider audience than their nominal recipient.

[SUP]He must convince Hannah,her family and the Quaker Friends of his fitness for marriage. He combines the humility of the supplicant with the fervour of the devotee in a style uniting the virtues of Politeness and Sensibility. Unfortunately none of Hannah’sreplies arepreserved, although there are occasions when what she has said can be construed from his reply.[/SUP]
[SUP]Thomas Hutton Rawlinson was the tenth child and fifth son of the Lancaster merchant of the same name, and his wife Mary Dilworth. He was therefore scion of two of the most influential business families in the north-west and, in Hannah Satterthwaite, he was planning to marry the daughter of a third. Little information is available about Thomas or Hannah,but it is probably right to assume, from the nature of the Quaker community, that they had known each other from childhood and may well have been destined by their families to strengthen the alliances even more. However prudential this marriage may have been,the letters suggest–on Thomas’s part at least–considerable fervour. They have none of the "distinctive Quaker elements in their language, content, and rhythm "that Susan Whyman notes, nor arethere radicaldifferences in formsof address, dating systems, or the names of days and months. They contain few mentions of God, religion or the Quaker community, except as they related to the marriage. Rawlinson maybe "too sanguine in my expectations of Happiness "because "real, perfect and uninterrupted Tranquillity maybe denied ushere as Mortals and more peculiarly belong to Eternity,"but he believes it "both possible and probable we may be happy here" as long as "we are virtuous". In an echo ofthe many published encouragements for a wife to be a confidante and comforter, he enthused:

When I can fly for Comfort to the partner of my Heart every Burthen 
that afflicts the Spirits would immediately become alleviated, the
disquietudes of life less frequent and but of a moment’s duration–by
the dear Emollient her Tenderness of soul would prescribe–by the
relief I should find in pouring out the in most secrets of my Breast to the
Object of my love–one in whom I cou’d confide with pleasure &
satisfaction.

In the first letter of this collection he wrote: "Confident of my dear Miss Satterthwaite’s Goodness and Generosity, I venture to expose my sentiments on paper, to open my heart more largely and to tell her again that I do sincerely love her". In this very first
sentence we find themes that were to be reiterated and developed throughout the correspondence: his praise of her personal qualities, readiness to reveal his own feelings, and the sincere expression of his affection for her. He amplified his admiration later in the same letter: 

Why are you possessed of so many Beauties, so superior to the rest of your Sex? Excuse me, Hannah, pardon the warmth of my imagination, it all arises from the Passion I have for you and the certainty there is of your many amiable Perfections, so well known and admired by your Humble suitor.
[/SUP][SUP] 
He apologises again four days later, but blames his "restlessness and disquietude" on "Suspence [sic] and uncertainty in the pursuit of what is so dear to my existence". It is of course "you, my dearest Hannah [who] with one Word can alleviate [my] distress". 
Her reticence may suggest indecision or else some delight at being the "absolute centre of attention", or the "protagonist of a thrilling drama" which Rawlinson is creating by his insistence on an answer to his proposal. Not content to praise Hannah alone Rawlinson broadens his encomium to include women in general: "if we wish to paint our imagination to the Idea of Celestial excellence in its softest Array we must look up to an accomplished woman – nought on Earth can be so emblematical". This may be addressed to Hannah’s sisters and cousins. But he is also attracted by the state of matrimony itself: "tho’ the state is unknown to me yet I could dwell upon the rapturous thought forever and paint to myself scenes of Happiness superior to every other engagement beyond the Limits of Comparison". These strong feelings and her lack of response to his pleas for betrothal keep him in a constant state of anxiety: 

Oh ! Hannah would you but give me leave to hope - wou’d you once pronounce the Tidings of my Fate to be happy and confer that Happiness by the pledge of your dear Hand & Heart – most supremely Blessed should I be – then shou’d I look forward with enlivened spirits towards this paradise of Bliss, and offer up my thanks to that bounteous Heaven that so abundantly rewarded my Importunities.

It is, he argues in a later letter, "No Breach of either delicacy or decorum [...] for a Lady to give her Hand where her Heart was before engaged." The connection of "hand and heart" might imply the handing over of property as well as affection to the lover.
This is the nearest the correspondence comes to mentioning financial negotiations or settlements. They would certainly have occurred but could have been conducted by the fathers or their proxies without the couple’s involvement.  

Either deliberately, or for some other reason, Hannah continues to hesitate. Thomas writes: 
impatient must be the Throbs & longings of my Soul after profession of so dear a Blessing – and you must – you will - excuse me – when I wish for your acquiescence to my Happiness – do, dear Hannah, give me leave, to ask for early Bliss – you have it in your Power to confer the greatest on me who loves you beyond description [...] and has a Heart capable of entertaining the highest sense of its obligation [...] 

She remains unforthcoming early the next month when he cannot understand why she "requests of me not to think of furnishing the house [...] why would she protract the Gift of Happiness and Joy to the person she intends and it is in her power to bestow it." That something more than her irresolution is preventing their immediate union is hinted at by his argument early in the correspondence that: 

If we expect to enjoy more superior pleasures in Matrimony why my dearest girl ought we not to embrace the earliest opportunity but show the World and each other, we espouse affections warmly connected with the Heart. That we love more than to admit of any Consideration being sufficient to delay the Completion of our Joys. I should contemn the Censures of the World when I know myself happy in the affections of my lovely Hannah."

Once again, the public intrudes on the private. "The World" - the Quaker meeting or their families – appears resistant to their marriage. Without evidence, we can only conjecture that perhaps their ages - she is not quite 21 and he only 25 – or his ill-health might be the cause. Whatever the difficulty, it is soon overcome and by the end of April he is in London with his sister and hers, exercising the increasingly manly function of choosing materials, silver plate and china for the home they will share in Liverpool. "The greatest part of our time," he writes, "is spent in shopping and our Apartments are the likeness of a Warehouse". Purchase of household goods and furnishings without the woman’s involvement was becoming common practice for men; he was furnishing a house to bring her to, although it is not clear whether it had been his bachelor house or somewhere new to both of them.

Involving their sisters is to ensure his purchases are likely to suit Hannah’s taste. It also helps to cement family relationships. He is pleased when the goods eventually arrive and "you think our Taste has been sufficiently extended". He refuses, though, to take the credit and "thought the Ladies were so much superior to me in their Judgements".
 
As well as household goods, the material for Hannah’s wedding dress was being selected by Thomas and the sisters. 
Yesterday morning we made a Grand Tour through the Silk Shops and I suppose laid out nearly £40 when my dear Hannah was purchased a most delicate White, the newest Taste. She will look most elegant in it, and the Ladies have visited the Gentleman who has the honour of making it up.
 
White, sometimes with silver, had become the fashionable colour for the bride’s gown replacing the more traditional blue or yellow. Bridesmaids, bride’s mother and other important women guests might also wear white. Veils were not worn but wedding ‘favours’ were usually white ribbons. The visitors, particularly Hannah’s sister, Polly, for whom this was the first visit to the capital, are also enjoying some of the London entertainments. "She says it is most charming, this dear London, there is no wonder people are so attached to it where every moment has its particular pleasures." 

Progress towards their wedding can be judged from his letter to Hannah in mid-May. 
our good Friends at Warrington gave me their Liberty to accomplish a design which at present engages so much of my attention […] that I can’t help exclaiming to myself, I am the happiest Rogue existing, or, by the Blessing of God I shall be.

He was ill at the Friends meeting and became annoyed with one of the officers who told the meeting that he had to leave as soon as he had made his proposal to marry Hannah. "Any News of this kind travels fast – and you may think how ill grieved I was at Mr R for exposing me".

As Quakers, they were not subject to the requirements of the 1753 Marriage Act and so were not expected to have the banns called or to be married in an Anglican church (as did people of all other faiths except Jews).
They did, though, need the permission of the Friends meeting. Rawlinson spoke to the meeting and was examined on the purity of his intentions before being given Clearness, for which he would be issued a certificate. Hannah, either genuinely, because she now understood the reality of her situation, or as a matter of form, must have expressed doubts about her suitability to be his bride because on May 19, he wrote. 

Worthy my regard – Yes, my dearest Hannah thou art thrice doubly worthy of every mark of Love and Friendship, a Soul inspired by the Virtue can show. However, I am happy in knowing thee to be a Woman possessed of every qualification my Heart could wish for or that any Man of Feeling or sensibility could desire. 

Rawlinson’s reference to himself as ‘A Man of Feeling’ is as near as he comes to suggesting any kind of rhetorical influences or giving a name to the self-image he is creating throughout the letters. Had he read the novel, published five years earlier, or was it merely a term with which he was familiar? 

Did Hannah understand the literary as well as emotional implications ? There is of course no way of knowing. He is "enraptured" by her inquiries after his health – "to think myself necessary to the Peace of her whose Love and Friendship I value beyond my own existence." In the man of Sensibility, concern for physical health intensifies emotional expression.
He refuses to do as she had obviously suggested – "Burn your letter, my dearest Hannah, no, excuse me, I too much revere any performance of her I love so dearly". He is less sanguine about his own epistolary skills, and there are several occasions in the correspondence when we find complaints such as: "I find every expression language can compose too feeble to convey my ardent Wishes or the fondness of my Soul in a manner satisfactory to its fondness for You".

But, he enthuses about the spiritual purpose of marriage. 
Oh Hannah, every hour tells me more and more that you are really necessary to my Peace if not to my Existence and I cou’d repeat forever your many Virtues [….] now they will always wander to that blessed day the fixed period which is to be the Epoch from which we are to date the time of our (certain assured) happy Union – in which may God be pleased to appoint as a constant Guardian to our Felicity some goodly Genie under whose secure protection our days may glide on with Serenity & Joy 

This is a more mature Rawlinson than the passionate lover of only months earlier. Gone is the artificial reference to her as a "Charmer" which appears six times in the correspondence and seems to link back to an earlier and more antagonistic model of romantic relations. The longing for "bliss" disappears; instead, the key words in this letter written a few days before their marriage – Peace , Existence, Virtue, Epoch, Happy, Union, God, Felicity, Serenity and Joy – encapsulate features of the dominant marital ideology which was explored in the previous chapter. He delineates the boundaries of a marriage with high expectations of both rational and sentimental accomplishment. 

They were married at the Lancaster and Yealand Quaker Meeting House on June 5, 1776. Their marriage certificate, different from the standard version required by Hardwicke’s Act, included signatures of the entire congregation, not just the couple and their families. It certifies that, before the assembly, Thomas took Hannah by the hand and promised the Friends that he "would be unto her a loving and just husband until it shall please the Lord by death to separate us". Substituting only the word ‘faithful’ for Thomas’s ‘just’, Hannah made the same promise to the Friends with regard to her husband. This is a clear example of the ‘public’ purpose of marriage: these promises were made to the congregation more than to each other. They were intended to ensure the stability of the marriage and therefore the security of families, business and faith. 

After the ceremony, the couple set off for Liverpool and we know from a letter written in May that they were to be accompanied by her father. Marriage brings families as well as individuals together, particularly, perhaps, in the Quaker society with its commitment to business and integrity. In this letter Rawlinson is furthering a relationship with his future father-in-law based on esteem for the older man. It was, though, to be a short-lived marriage: the ill-health which may have caused Hannah’s reluctance to commit herself persisted through the marriage and he died on March 5, 1777, just over a month before the birth of their daughter Mary Hutton Rawlinson. Hannah lived to be 87, never re-married but lived all her life in Lancaster. There is no evidence of her reception of Thomas’s letters or her reaction to his sentiments, although the fact that she retained them and that they passed into the hands of their daughter, Mary Hutton Vyvyan and thence to the archive of her Cornish gentry husband, may be significant. But, probably more than any others in this chapter, these letters express unmistakable affection for their love object, and best reflect the culture of sensibility in which they were written. They also demonstrate consciousness of the ‘political’ environment in which they will be read, where family and church may determine the outcome." 
[/SUP]


----------



## Wilberforce (Feb 25, 2017)

She must have been privy to his feelings I think as I doubt a man would dare reveal his feelings so openly if not in those days. It is a beautiful post though.


----------



## grahamg (Feb 25, 2017)

*Compare and contrast*



Wilberforce said:


> She must have been privy to his feelings I think as I doubt a man would dare reveal his feelings so openly if not in those days. It is a beautiful post though.



Thank you for your post (once again), and I agree with your assessment - the full story of their romance given in the link, though not easy to pick out from a long report, shows that their marriage, when it came, was regretably curtailed due to his illhealth, but points out too that he expected his letters to be read by his intended's family and maybe their church too.

As a contrast to the above I want to lay before you a post, taken from "elsewhere" recently, showing some very different attitudes to "romance" today (though I hope the poster is exaggerating their claims or misreading most peoples views on "romance" anyway). I think it fair to say they are the type I was told by my mother to be wary of or stay clear:

A female poster from "elsewhere" wrote: 
"As somebody who has had a few office relationships in her life, it's always been with a co-worker rather than the boss.

Sometimes relationships work out, sometimes they don't. I doubt many of us didn't dip our toes in the dating pond before we married, although this being an over 50's forum perhaps that's not the case so much. Being 54 myself, I certainly kissed a lot of frogs before I married (then divorced) the king of toads.

Many people spend most of their waking life at work, where else are they meant to meet people? It's no surprise that many get together with somebody they work with - often employees socialise together too, after all - it's where you meet people more than any other place. Whether those relationships last or not is down to the strength of that relationship, just as it is with any other relationship formed in any other social arena.

I read somewhere above somebody mentioning morals. Who decides what is and isn't immoral. I certainly don't think that single people - male or female - having relationships (******, romantic or both) is immoral, although the inference (from reading a thread "elsewhere) seemed only to be that single women having relationships (that didn't end in marriage) was immoral. Perhaps that was unintentionally sexist rather than deliberate. Rather an old-fashioned view and, in my opinion, very narrow-minded. ****** experience - amidst males or females - is no indication of a lack of morals in my opinion - depending, of course, on how you define moral and immoral. I myself was very sexually (and always safely!) active during my single 20's and 30's; I consider myself to be and always have been a moral, decent person. My ****** history or activity does not define me as a person, an argument that gay rights activists have made (and thankfully won in many places, although the fight continues in many places) over many years.

Also read a remark about parents opinion on their (grown) kids ****** activities - it's really none of their business, don't you think? I certainly never discussed my sex life with my parents, beyond the early days when the usual talks of pregnancy and being safe were covered. Being 54 I was single and sexually active during the start of the AIDS epidemic, so it was something that was very much in everybody's minds back then, less so these days sadly.

Somebody talking about fathers' rights - I do think there should be more equality in how fathers are dealt with during the breakdown of a relationship. I fully support fathers4justice and other fathers' rights groups. Sadly I wish my ex-husband had stepped up to the plate as a father upon our divorce, but we've (my daughter and I) not seen him in 12 years. This doesn't, however, affect my opinion on those fathers desperate to be involved in their children's lives and unfairly hampered from doing so. Using a child as a weapon is, to me, the definition of immoral. The bedroom tax was another way that divorced men (as well as other groups in society) were unfairly targeted."


----------



## horseless carriage (Jan 14, 2021)

Have you ever made a romantic gesture? My wife and I love ballroom dancing, on the morning after our wedding, we dressed up in full attire and danced on a beach. For my wedding gift to her I gave her this print, she loves it as much for the memory as for the title:

"Dance Me to the End of Love"​by Jack Vettriano


----------

