OOPS! A correction....
Posted by Caroline on May 24, 1998 at 10:36:43:
In response to Okay, before we start, written by Caroline on May 23, 1998 at 23:50:38
Linden, in that last post I muddled up your two Earls . My only excuse is that it was late at night...I can see and think more clearly now!
I must , however, question your assumption that the historical Earls and the earls mentioned in P&P are the same persons. The fact that JA borrowed the names of two Earldoms that were defunct suggests to me that she wasn't saying anything about the real people at all. I think they were a convenience only. Likewise, just because the real Earl Fitzwilliam ws Lord Lieutenant of Yorkshire, doesn't necessarily mean that Colonel Fitzwilliam's father was intended to be so, or that The Earldom of _______ (Jane Austen's term) was anywhere near Yorkshire at all.
In short, I think you can imagine whatever you will about Darcy's relatives and their politics, but you cannot really use them to refute Chapman's Chronology. It's a fun idea, but it doesn't really work out as a logical construction. Sorry!
- Earl Fitzwilliam and Fitzwilliam Darcy Linden 20:01:23 5/24/98
(1)
- More on Earl Fitzwilliam Linden 20:02:35 5/28/98
(0)
- More on Earl Fitzwilliam Linden 20:02:35 5/28/98
(0)
- JA's social awareness Tenby 13:21:47 5/24/98
(0)
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.
