|
|
must beg pardon of my fair readers if I begin my attack here. 'Tis now
some years since this remarkable fashion made a figure in the world and
from its first beginning divided the public opinion as to its
convenience and beauty. For my part I was always willing to indulge it
under some restrictions: that is to say if 'tis not a rival to the dome
of St. Paul's to incumber the way, or a tub for the residence of a new
Diogenes. If it does not eclipse too much beauty above or discover too
much below. In short, I am for living in peace, and I am afraid a fine
lady with too much liberty in this particular would render my own
imagination an enemy to my repose."
Perhaps, however, in this particular instance, men had some excuse for
their tirade; it may have come as a matter of self-preservation. We can
more readily understand their feelings when we learn the size of the
cause of it. In October, 1774, after Margaret Hutchinson had been
presented at the Court of St. James, she wrote her sister: "We called
for Mrs. Keene, but found that one coach would not contain more than two
such mighty hoops; and papa and Mr. K. were obliged to go in another
coach."
But hoops and bonnets and other extravagant forms of dress were not the
only phases of woman's adornment that startled the men and fretted their
souls. The very manner in which the ladies wore their hair caused their
lords and masters to run to the newspaper with a fresh outburst of
contempt. In 1731 some Massachusetts citizen with more wrath than
caution expressed himself thus: "I come now to the Head Dress--the very
highest point of female eloquence, and here I find such a variety of
modes, such a medley of decoration, that 'tis hard to know where to fix,
lace and cambrick, gauze and fringe, feathers and ribbands, create such
a confusion, occasion such frequent changes that it defies art,
judgement, or taste to recommend them to any standard, or reduce them to
any order. That ornament of the hair which is styled the Horns, and has
been in vogue so long, was certainly first calculated by some
good-natured lady to keep her spouse in countenance."[139]
This last statement proved too much; it was the straw that broke the
camel's back; even the meek colonial women could not suffer this to go
unanswered. In the next number of the same paper appeared the following,
written probably by some high-spirited dame: "You seem to blame us for
our innovations and fleeting fancy in dress which you are most
notoriously guilty of, who esteem yourselves the mighty, wise, and head
of the species. Therefore, I think it highly necessary that you show us
the example first, and begin the reformation among yourselves, if you
intend your observations shall have any with us. I leave the world to
judge whether our petticoat resembles the dome of St. Paul's nearer than
you in your long coats do the Monument. You complain of our masculine
appearance in our riding habits, and indeed we think it is but
reasonable that we should make reprisals upon you for the invasion of
our dress and figure, and the advances you make in effeminency, and your
degeneracy from the figure of man. Can there be a more ridiculous
appearance than to see a smart fellow within the compass of five feet
immersed in a huge long coat to his heels with cuffs to the arm pits,
the shoulders and breast fenced against the inclemencies of the weather
by a monstrous cape, or rather short cloak, shoe toes, pointed to the
heavens in imitation of the Lap-landers, with buckles of a harnass size?
I confess the beaux with their toupee wigs make us extremely merry, and
frequently put me in mind of my favorite monkey both in figure and
apishness, and were it not for a reverse of circumstances, I should be apt
to mistake it for Pug, and treat him with the same familiarity."[140]
_IV. Extravagance in Dress_
To all appearances it was less safe in colonial days for mere man to
comment on female attire than at present; for the typical gentlemen
before 1800 probably wore as many velvets, brocades, satins, laces, and
wigs as any woman of the day or since. Each sex, however, wasted more
than enough of both time and money on the matter. Grieve, the translator
of Chastellux, the Frenchman who made rather extensive observations in
America at the close of the Revolution, says in a footnote to
Chastellux's _Travels_: "The rage for dress amongst the women in
America, in the very height of the miseries of the war, was beyond all
bounds; nor was it confined to the great towns; it prevailed equally on
the sea coasts and in the woods and solitudes of the vast extent of
country from Florida to New Hampshire. In travelling into the interior
parts of Virginia I spent a delicious day at an inn, at the ferry of the
Shenandoah, or the Catacton Mountains, with the most engaging,
accomplished and voluptuous girls, the daughters of the landlord, a
native of Boston transplanted thither, who with all the gifts of nature
possessed the arts of dress not unworthy of Parisian milliners, and went
regularly three times a week to the distance of seven miles, to attend
the lessons of one DeGrace, a French dancing master, who was making a
fortune in the country."[141]
Such a statement must not, of course, be taken too seriously; for, as we
have seen, many women, such as Mrs. Washington, Abigail Adams, and Eliza
Pinckney, were almost parsimonious in dress during the great strife.
Doubtless there were many, however, particularly in the cities, who
could not or would not restrain their love of finery, especially when so
many handsome and gaily uniformed British officers were at hand. But
long before and after the Revolution there seems to have been no lack of
fashionable clothing. The old diaries and account books tell the tale.
Thus, Washington has left us an account of articles ordered from London
for his wife. Among these were "a salmon-colored tabby velvet of the
enclosed pattern, with satin flowers, to be made in a sack and coat,
ruffles to be made of Brussels lace or Point, proper to be worn with the
above _negligee_, to cost L20; 2 pairs of white silk hose; 1 pair of
white satin shoes of the smallest fives; 1 fashionable hat or bonnet; 6
pairs woman's best kid gloves; 6 pairs mitts; 1 dozen breast-knots; 1
dozen most fashionable cambric pocket handkerchiefs; 6 pounds perfumed
powder; a puckered petticoat of fashionable color; a silver tabby velvet
petticoat; handsome breast flowers;..." For little Miss Custis was
ordered "a coat made of fashionable silk, 6 pairs of white kid gloves,
handsome egrettes of different sorts, and one pair of pack thread
stays...."[142]
These may seem indeed rather strange gifts for a mere girl; but we
should remember that children of that day wore dresses similar to those
of their mothers, and such items as high-heeled shoes, heavy stays, and
enormous hoop petticoats were not at all unusual. Many things unknown to
the modern child were commonly used by the daughters of the wealthier
parents, such as long-armed gloves and complexion masks, made of linen
or velvet, and sun-bonnets sewed through the hair and under the
neck--all this to ward off every ray of the sun, and thus preserve the
delicate complexion of childhood.
That we may judge of the quality and quantity of a girl's apparel in
those fastidious days, examine this list of clothes sent by Colonel John
Lewis of Virginia in 1727 to be used by his ward, in an English school:
"A cap ruffle and tucker, the lace 5 shillings per yard,
1 pair White Stays,
8 pair White Kid gloves,
2 pair coloured kid gloves,
2 pair worsted hose,
3 pair thread hose,
1 pair silk shoes laced,
1 pair morocco shoes,
1 Hoop Coat,
1 Hat,
4 pair plain Spanish shoes,
2 pair calf shoes,
1 mask,
1 fan,
1 necklace,
1 Girdle and buckle,
1 piece fashionable calico,
4 yards ribbon for knots,
1-1/2 yd. Cambric,
1 mantua and coat of lute-string."[143]
One New England miss, sent to a finishing school at Boston, had twelve
silk gowns, but her teacher "wrote home that she must have another gown
of a 'recently imported rich fabric,' which was at once bought for her
because it was suitable for her rank and station."[144] Even the frugal
Ben Franklin saw to it that his wife and daughter dressed as well as the
best of them in rich gowns of silk. In the _Pennsylvania Gazette_ of
1750 there appeared the following advertisement: "Whereas on Saturday
night last the house of Benjamin Franklin of this city, Printer, was
broken open, and the following things feloniously taken away, viz., a
double necklace of gold beads, a woman's long scarlet cloak almost new,
with a double cape, a woman's gown, of printed cotton of the sort
called brocade print, very remarkable, the ground dark, with large red
roses, and other large and yellow flowers, with blue in some of the
flowers, with many green leaves; a pair of women's stays covered with
white tabby before, and dove colour'd tabby behind...."
It seems that in richness of dress Philadelphia led the colonial world,
even outrivaling the expenditure of the wealthy Virginia planters for
this item. While Philadelphia was the political and social center of the
day this extravagance was especially noticeable; but when New York
became the capital the Quaker city was almost over-shadowed by the
gaiety displayed in dress by the Dutch city. "You will find here the
English fashions," says St. John de Crevecoeur. "In the dress of the
women you will see the most brilliant silks, gauzes, hats and borrowed
hair.... If there is a town on the American continent where English
luxury displayed its follies it was in New York."[145]
All the blame, however, must not be placed upon the shoulders of
colonial dames. What else could the women do? They felt compelled to
make an appearance at least equal to that of the men, and probably
Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed as one of these men. Even the
conservative Washington appeared on state occasions in "black velvet, a
silver or steel hilted small sword at his left side, pearl satin
waistcoat, fine linen and lace, hair full powdered, black silk hose, and
bag."[146] Such finery was not limited to the ruling classes of the
land; a Boston printer of the days immediately following the Revolution
appeared in a costume that surpassed the most startling that Boston of
our times could display. "He wore a pea-green coat, white vest, nankeen
small clothes, white silk stockings, and pumps fastened with silver
buckles which covered at least half the foot, from instep to toe. His
small clothes were tied at the knees with ribbon of the same color in
double bows, the ends reaching down to the ankles. His hair in front was
well loaded with pomatum, frizzled or craped and powdered. Behind, his
natural hair was augmented by the addition of a large queue called
vulgarly a false tail, which, enrolled in some yards of black ribbon,
hung half way down his back."[147]
Surely this is enough of the men; let us return to the women. See the
future Dolly Madison at her first meeting with the "great, little Mr.
Madison." She had lived a Quaker during her girlhood, but she grew
bravely over it. "Her gown of mulberry satin, with tulle kerchief folded
over the bosom, set off to the best advantage the pearly white and
delicate rose tints of that complexion which constituted the chief
beauty of Dolly Todd."[148] The ladies of the Tory class evidently tried
to outshine those of the patriot party, and when there was a British
function of any sort,--as was often the case at Philadelphia--the scene
was indeed gay, with richly gowned matrons and maids on the arms of
English officers, brave with gold lace and gold buttons. One great fete
or festival known as the "Meschianza," given at Philadelphia, was so
gorgeous a pageant that years afterwards society of the capital talked
about it. Picture the costume of Miss Franks of Philadelphia on that
occasion: "The dress is more ridiculous and pretty than anything I ever
saw--great quantity of different colored feathers on the head at a time
besides a thousand other things. The Hair dress'd very high in the shape
Miss Vining's was the night we returned from Smiths--the Hat we found in
your Mother's Closet wou'd be of a proper size. I have an afternoon cap
with one wing--tho' I assure you I go less in the fashion than most of
the Ladies--none being dress'd without a hoop...."[149]
And, again, perhaps the modern woman can appreciate the following
description of a costume seen at the inaugural ball of 1789: "It was a
plain celestial blue satin gown, with a white satin petticoat. On the
neck was worn a very large Italian gauze handkerchief, with border
stripes of satin. The head-dress was a pouf of satin in the form of a
globe, the creneaux or head-piece which was composed of white satin,
having a double wing in large pleats and trimmed with a wreath of
artificial roses. The hair was dressed all over in detached curls, four
of which in two ranks, fell on each side of the neck and were relieved
behind by a floating chignon."[150]
Unlike the other first ladies of the day, Martha Washington made little
effort toward ostentation, and her plain manner of dress was sometimes
the occasion of astonishment and comment on the part of wives of foreign
representatives. Says Miss Chambers concerning this contrast between
European women and Mrs. Washington, as shown at a birthday ball tendered
the President in 1795: "She was dressed in a rich silk, but entirely
without ornament, except the animation her amiable heart gives to her
countenance. Next her were seated the wives of the foreign ambassadors,
glittering from the floor to the summit of their head-dress. One of the
ladies wore three large ostrich feathers, her brow encircled by a
sparkling fillet of diamonds; her neck and arms were almost covered with
jewels, and two watches were suspended from her girdle, and all
reflecting the light from a hundred directions."[151]
Nor was this richness of dress among foreign visitors confined to the
women. Sally McKean, who became the wife of the Spanish minister to
America, wore at one state function, "a blue satin dress, trimmed with
white crape and flowers, and petticoat of white crape richly embroidered
and across the front a festoon of rose color, caught up with flowers";
but her future husband had "his hair powdered like a snow ball; with
dark striped silk coat lined with satin, black silk breeches, white silk
stockings, shoes and buckles. He had by his side an elegant hilted
small-sword, and his chapeau tipped with white feathers, under his
arm."[152]
There were, of course, no fashion plates in that day, nor were there any
"living models" to strut back and forth before keen-eyed customers; but
fully dressed dolls were imported from France and England, and sent from
town to town as examples of properly attired ladies. Eliza Southgate
Bowne, after seeing the dolls in her shopping expeditions, wrote to a
friend: "Caroline and I went a-shopping yesterday, and 'tis a fact that
the little white satin Quaker bonnets, cap-crowns, are the most
fashionable that are worn--lined with pink or blue or white--but I'll
not have one, for if any of my old acquaintance should meet me in the
street they would laugh.... Large sheer-muslin shawls, put on as Sally
Weeks wears hers, are much worn; they show the form through and look
pretty. Silk nabobs, plaided, colored and white are much worn--very
short waists--hair very plain."
Of course, the men of the day, found a good deal of pleasure in poking
fun at woman's use of dress and ornaments as bait for entrapping lovers,
and many a squib expressing this theory appeared in the newspapers.
These cynical notes no more represented the general opinion of the
people than do similar satires in the comic sheets of to-day; but they
are interesting at least, as showing a long prevailing weakness among
men. The following sarcastic advertisement, for instance, was written by
John Trumbull:
"To Be Sold at Public Vendue,
The Whole Estate of
Isabella Sprightly, Toast and Coquette,
(Now retiring from Business)
"Imprimis, all the tools and utensils necessary for carrying on
the trade, viz.: several bundles of darts and arrows well pointed
and capable of doing great execution. A considerable quantity of
patches, paint, brushes and cosmetics for plastering, painting,
and white-washing the face; a complete set of caps, "a la mode a
Paris," of all sizes, from five to fifteen inches in height; with
several dozens of cupids, very proper to be stationed on a ruby
lip, a diamond eye, or a roseate cheek.
"Item, as she proposes by certain ceremonies to transform one of
her humble servants into a husband and keep him for her own use,
she offers for sale, Florio, Daphnis, Cynthio, and Cleanthes,
with several others whom she won by a constant attendance on
business during the space of four years. She can prove her
indisputable right thus to dispose of them by certain deeds of
gifts, bills of sale, and attestation, vulgarly called love
letters, under their own hands and seals. They will be offered
very cheap, for they are all of them broken-hearted, consumptive,
or in a dying condition. Nay, some of them have been dead this
half year, as they declare and testify in the above mentioned
writing.
"N.B. Their hearts will be sold separately."
When all the above implements and wiles failed to entrap a lover, and
the coquette was left as a "wall-flower," as the Germans express it, the
men of the day satirized the unfortunate one just as mercilessly. Read,
for example, a few lines from the _Progress of Dullness_, thought to be
a very humorous poem in its time:
"Poor Harriett now hath had her day;
No more the beaux confess her sway;
New beauties push her from the stage;
She trembles at the approach of age,
And starts to view the altered face
That wrinkles at her in her glass.
* * * * *
"Despised by all and doomed to meet
Her lovers at her rivals' feet,
She flies assemblies, shuns the ball,
And cries out vanity, on all;
* * * * *
"Now careless grown of airs polite
Her noon-day night-cap meets the sight;
Her hair uncombed collects together
With ornaments of many a feather.
* * * * *
"She spends her breath as years prevail
At this sad wicked world to rail,
To slander all her sex impromptu,
And wonder what the times will come to."
During the earlier years of the seventeenth century, as we have noted,
this deprecatory opinion by men concerning woman's garb was not confined
to ridicule in journals and books, but was even incorporated into the
laws of several towns and colonies. Women were compelled to dress in a
certain manner and within fixed financial limits, or suffered the
penalties of the courts. Many were the "presentations," as such cases
were called, of our colonial ancestors. As material wealth increased,
however, dress became more and more elaborate until in the era shortly
before and after the Revolution fashions were almost extravagant. Costly
satins, silks, velvets, and brocades were among the common items of
dress purchased by even the moderately well-to-do city and planter folk.
If space permitted, many quotations by travellers from abroad,
accustomed to the splendor of European courts, could be presented to
show the surprising quality and good taste displayed in the garments of
the better classes of the New World. To their honor, however, it may be
remembered that these same American women in the days of tribulation
when their husbands were battling for a new nation were willing to cast
aside such indications of wealth and pride, and don the humble homespun
garments made by their own hands.
FOOTNOTES:
[128] Fiske: _Old Virginia_, Vol. I, p. 246.
[129] Page 76.
[130] Smyth: _Writings of B. Franklin_, Vol. IV, p. 449.
[131] _Ibid._ Vol. III, p. 431.
[132] _Ibid._ Vol. III, p. 419.
[133] _Ibid._ Vol. III, p. 438.
[134] _Letters of A. Adams_, p. 282.
[135] _Letters of A. Adams_, p. 250.
[136] Wharton: _Martha Washington_, p. 227.
[137] Buckingham: _Reminiscences_, Vol. I, p. 34.
[138] Buckingham. Vol. I, p. 88.
[139] Buckingham, Vol. I, p. 115.
[140] _Ibid._
[141] Vol. II, p. 115.
[142] Wharton: _Martha Washington_, p. 59.
[143] Quoted in Earle: _Home Life in Colonial Days_, p. 290.
[144] Earle: _Home Life in Colonial Days_, p. 291.
[145] Wharton: _Through Colonial Doorways_, p. 89.
[146] Wharton: _M. Washington_, p. 225.
[147] Earle: _Home Life in Colonial Days_, p. 294.
[148] Goodwin: _Dolly Madison_, p. 54.
[149] Wharton: _Through Colonial Doorways_, p. 219.
[150] Wharton: _Through Colonial Doorways_, p. 79.
[151] Wharton: _Martha Washington_, p. 230.
[152] Crawford: _Romantic Days in the Early Republic_, p. 53.
CHAPTER V
COLONIAL WOMAN AND SOCIAL LIFE
_I. Southern Isolation and Hospitality_
In the earlier part of the seventeenth century the social life of the
colonists, at least in New England, was what would now be considered
monotonous and dull. Aside from marriages, funerals, and church-going
there was little to attract the Puritans from their steady routine of
farming and trading. In New York the Dutch were apparently contented
with their daily eating, drinking, smoking, and walking along the
Battery or out the country road, the Bowery. In Virginia life, as far as
social activities were concerned, was at first dull enough, although
even in the early days of Jamestown there was some display at the
Governor's mansion, while the sessions of court and assemblies brought
planters and their families to town for some brief period of balls,
banquets, and dancing.
As the seventeenth century progressed, however, visiting, dinner
parties, dances, and hunts in the South became more and more gay, and
the balls in the plantation mansions became events of no little
splendor. Wealth, gained through tobacco, increased rapidly in this
section, and the best that England and France could offer was not too
expensive for the luxurious homes of not only Virginia but Maryland and
South Carolina. The higher Dutch families of New York also began to show
considerable vigor socially; Philadelphia forgot the staid dignity of
its founder; and even New England, especially Boston, began to use
accumulated wealth in ways of levity that would have shocked the Puritan
fathers.
In the eighteenth-century South we find accounts of a carefree,
pleasure-loving, joyous mode of life that read almost like stories of
some fairy world. The traditions of the people, among whom was an
element of Cavalier blood, the genial climate, the use of slave labor,
the great demand for tobacco, all united to develop a social life much
more unbounded and hospitable than that found in the northern colonies.
But this constant raising of tobacco soon exhausted the soil; and the
planters, instead of attempting to enrich their lands, found it more
profitable constantly to advance into the forest wilderness to the west,
where the process of gaining wealth at the expense of the soil might be
repeated. This was well for American civilization, but not immediately
beneficial to the intellectual growth of the people. The mansions were
naturally far apart; towns were few in number; schools were almost
impossible; and successful newspapers were for many years simply out of
the question. Washington's estate at Mt. Vernon contained over four
thousand acres; many other farms were far larger; each planter lived in
comparative isolation. Those peculiar advantages arising from living
near a city were totally absent. As late as 1740 Eliza Pinckney wrote a
friend in England: "We are 17 miles by land and 6 by water from Charles
Town."
Thus, each large owner had a tendency to become a petty feudal lord,
controlling large numbers of slaves and unlimited resources of soil and
labor within an arbitrary grasp. As there were numerous navigable
streams, many of the planters possessed private wharfs where tobacco
could be loaded for shipment and goods from abroad delivered within a
short distance of the mansion. Such an economic scheme made trading
centers almost unnecessary and tended to keep the population scattered.
"In striking contrast to New England was the absence of towns, due
mainly to two reasons--first, the wealth of the water courses, which
enabled every planter of means to ship his products from his own wharf,
and, secondly, the culture of tobacco, which scattered the people in a
continual search for new and richer lands. This rural life, while it
hindered co-operation, promoted a spirit of independence among the
whites of all classes which counter-acted the aristocratic form of
government."[153]
Channing, writing of conditions in 1800, the close of this period, says:
"The great Virginia plantations were practically self-sustaining, so far
as the actual necessaries of life were concerned; the slaves had to be
clothed and fed whether tobacco and wheat could be sold or not, but they
produced, with the exception of the raw material for making their
garments, practically all that was essential to their well being. The
money which the Virginia planters received for their staple products was
used to purchase articles of luxury--wine for the men, articles of
apparel for the women, furnishings for the house, and things of that
kind, and to pay the interest on the load of indebtedness which the
Virginia aristocracy owed at home and broad."[154]
Again, the same historian says: "The plenty of everything made
hospitality universal, and the wealth of the country was greatly
promoted by the opening of the forests. Indeed, so contented were the
people with their new homes (1652) that ... 'seldom (if ever) any that
hath continued in Virginia any time will or do desire to live in
England, but post back with what expedition they can, although many are
landed men in England, and have good estates there, and divers ways of
preferments propounded to them, to entice and perswade their
continuants.'"[155]
Now, this comparative isolation of the plantation life made visiting and
neighborliness doubly grateful and, hospitality and the spirit of
kindness became almost proverbial in Virginia. As far back as 1656 John
Hammond of Virginia and Maryland noted this fact with no little pride in
his _Leah and Rachel_; for, said he, "If any fall sick and cannot
compasse to follow his crope, which if not followed, will soon be lost,
the adjoyning neighbors will either voluntarily or upon a request joyn
together, and work in it by spels, untill the honour recovers, and that
gratis, so that no man by sicknesse lose any part of his years worke....
Let any travell, it is without charge, and at every house is
entertainment as in a hostelry, and with it hearty welcome are strangers
entertained.... In a word, Virginia wants not good victuals, wants not
good dispositions, and as God hath freely bestowed it, they as freely
impart with it, yet are there as well bad natures as good."
This spirit of brotherhood and hospitality, was, of course, very
necessary in the first days of colonization, and the sudden increase of
wealth prevented its becoming irksome in later days. Naturally, too, the
poorer classes copied after the aristocracy, and thus the custom became
universal along the Southern coast. As mentioned above, there was a
Cavalier strain throughout the section. As Robert Beverly observed in
his _History of Virginia_, written in 1705: "In the time of the
rebellion in England several good cavalier families went thither with
their effects, to escape the tyranny of the usurper, or acknowledgement
of his title." Such people had long been accustomed to rather lavish
expenditures and entertainment, and, as Beverly testifies, they did not
greatly change their mode of life after reaching America:
"For their recreation, the plantations, orchards and gardens
constantly afford them fragrant and delightful walks. In their
woods and fields, they have an unknown variety of vegetables, and
other varieties of Nature to discover. They have hunting, fishing
and fowling, with which they entertain themselves an hundred
ways. There is the most good nature and hospitality practised in
the world, both towards friends and strangers; but the worst of
it is, this generosity is attended now and then with a little too
much intemperance."
"The inhabitants are very courteous to travelers, who need no
other recommendation but the being human creatures. A stranger
has no more to do, but to enquire upon the road, where any
gentleman or good housekeeper lives, and there he may depend upon
being received with hospitality. This good nature is so general
among their people, that the gentry, when they go abroad, order
their principal servant to entertain all visitors, with
everything the plantation affords. And the poor planters, who
have but one bed, will very often sit up, or lie upon a form or
couch all night, to make room for a weary traveler, to repose
himself after his journey...."
Many other statements, not only by Americans, but by cultured foreigners
might be presented to show the charm of colonial life in Virginia. The
Marquis de Chastellux, one of the French Revolutionary generals, a man
who had mingled in the best society of Europe, was fascinated with the
evidence of luxury, culture and, feminine refinement of the Old
Dominion, and declared that Virginia women might become excellent
musicians if the fox-hounds would stop baying for a little while each
day. He met several ladies who sang well and "played on the
harpsichord"; he was delighted at the number of excellent French and
English authors he found in the libraries; and, above all, he was
surprised at the natural dignity of many of the older men and women, and
at the evidences of domestic felicity found in the great homes.
_II. Splendor in the Southern Home_
Of these vast, rambling mansions numerous descriptions have been handed
down to our day. The following, written in 1774, is an account recorded
in his diary by the tutor, Philip Fithian, in the family of a Virginia
planter:
"Mr. Carter has chosen for the place of his habitation a high
spot of Ground in Westmoreland County ... where he has erected a
large, Elegant House, at a vast expense, which commonly goes by
the name of Nomini-Hall. This House is built with Brick but the
bricks have been covered with strong lime Mortar, so that the
building is now perfectly white (erected in 1732). It is
seventy-six Feet long from East to West; & forty-four wide from
North to South, two stories high; ... It has five stacks of
Chimneys, tho' two of these serve only for ornaments."
"There is a beautiful Jutt, on the South side, eighteen feet
long, & eight Feet deep from the wall which is supported by three
pillars--On the South side, or front, in the upper story are four
Windows each having twenty-four Lights of Glass. In the lower
story are two Windows each having forty-two Lights of Glass, &
two Doors each having Sixteen Lights. At the east end the upper
story has three windows each with 18 lights; & below two windows
both with eighteen lights & a door with nine...."
"The North side I think is the most beautiful of all. In the
upper story is a row of seven windows with 18 lights a piece; and
below six windows, with the like number of lights; besides a
large Portico in the middle, at the sides of which are two
windows each with eighteen lights.... At the west end are no
Windows--The number of lights in all is five hundred, & forty
nine. There are four Rooms on a Floor, disposed of in the
following manner. Below is a dining Room where we usually sit;
the second is a dining-room for the Children; the third is Mr.
Carters study, and the fourth is a Ball-Room thirty Feet long.
Above stairs, one room is for Mr. & Mrs. Carter; the second for
the young Ladies; & the other two for occasional Company. As this
House is large, and stands on a high piece of Land it may be seen
a considerable distance."
Nor were these houses less elegantly furnished than magnificently
built. Chastellux was astounded at the taste and richness of the
ornaments and permanent fixtures, and declared of the Nelson Home at
Yorktown that "neither European taste nor luxury was excluded; a chimney
piece and some bas-reliefs of very fine marble exquisitely sculptured
were particularly admired." As Fisher says of such mansions, in his
interesting _Men, Women and Manners in Colonial Times:_ "They were
crammed from cellar to garret with all the articles of pleasure and
convenience that were produced in England: Russia leather chairs, Turkey
worked chairs, enormous quantities of damask napkins and table-linen,
silver and pewter ware, candle sticks of brass, silver and pewter,
flagons, dram-cups, beakers, tankards, chafing-dishes, Spanish tables,
Dutch tables, valuable clocks, screens, and escritoires."[156]
_III. Social Activities_
In such an environment a gay social life was eminently fitting, and how
often we may read between the lines of old letters and diaries the story
of such festive occasions. For instance, scan the records of the life of
Eliza Pinckney, and her beautiful daughter, one of the belles of
Charleston, and note such bits of information as the following:
"Governor Lyttelton will wait on the ladies at Belmont" (the home of
Mrs. Pinckney and her daughter); "Mrs. Drayton begs the pleasure of your
company to spend a few days"; "Lord and Lady Charles Montague's Compts
to Mrs. and Miss Pinckney, and if it is agreeable to them shall be glad
of their Company at the Lodge"; "Mrs. Glen presents her Compts to Mrs.
Pinckney and Mrs. Hyrne, hopes they got no Cold, and begs Mrs. Pinckney
will detain Mrs. Hyrne from going home till Monday, and that they
(together with Miss Butler and the 3 young Lady's) will do her the
favour to dine with her on Sunday." (Mr. Pinckney had been dead for
several years.)[157]
And again, in a letter written in her girlhood to her brother about
1743, Eliza Pinckney says of the people of Carolina:
"The people in genl are hospitable and honest, and the better
sort add to these a polite gentile behaviour. The poorer sort are
the most indolent people in the world or they could never be
wretched in so plentiful a country as this. The winters here are
very fine and pleasant, but 4 months in the year is extreamly
disagreeable, excessive hott, much thunder and lightening and
muskatoes and sand flies in abundance."
"Crs Town, the Metropolis, is a neat, pretty place. The
inhabitants polite and live in a very gentile manner. The streets
and houses regularly built--the ladies and gentlemen gay in their
dress; upon the whole you will find as many agreeable people of
both sexes for the size of the place as almost any
where...."[158]
Companies great enough to give the modern housewife nervous prostration
were often entertained at dinners, while many of the planters kept such
open house that no account was kept of the number of guests who came and
went daily and who commonly made themselves so much at home that the
host or hostess often scarcely disturbed them throughout their entire
stay. Several years after the Revolution George Washington recorded in
his diary the surprising fact that for the first time since he and
Martha Washington had returned to Mount Vernon, they had dined alone. As
Wharton says in her _Martha Washington_, "Warm hearted, open-handed
hospitality was constantly exercised at Mount Vernon, and if the master
humbly recorded that, although he owned a hundred cows, he had sometimes
to buy butter for his family, the entry seems to have been made in no
spirit of fault finding." Of this same Washingtonian hospitality one
French traveller, Brissot de Warville, wrote: "Every thing has an air of
simplicity in his [Washington's] house; his table is good, but not
ostentatious; and no deviation is seen from regularity and domestic
economy. Mrs. Washington superintends the whole, and joins to the
qualities of an excellent housewife that simple dignity which ought to
characterize a woman whose husband has acted the greatest part on the
theater of human affairs; while she possesses that amenity and manifests
that attention to strangers which renders hospitality so charming."[159]
With such hospitality there seemed to go a certain elevation in the
social life of Virginia and South Carolina entirely different from the
corrupt conditions found in Louisiana in the seventeenth century, and
also in contrast with the almost cautious manner in which the New
Englanders of the same period tasted pleasure. In those magnificent
Southern houses--Quincey speaks of one costing L8000, a sum fully equal
in modern buying capacity to $100,000--there was much stately dancing,
almost an extreme form of etiquette, no little genuine art, and music
of exceptional quality. The Charleston St. Cecilia Society, organized in
1737, gave numerous amateurs opportunities to hear and perform the best
musical compositions of the day, and its annual concerts, continued
until 1822, were scarcely ever equalled elsewhere in America, during the
same period. In the aristocratic circles formal balls were frequent, and
were exceedingly brilliant affairs. Eliza Pinckney, describing one in
1742, says: "...The Govr gave the Gentn a very gentile entertainment
at noon, and a ball at night for the ladies on the Kings birthnight, at
wch was a Crowded Audience of Gentn and ladies. I danced a minuet with
yr old acquaintance Capt Brodrick who was extreamly glad to see one so
nearly releated to his old friend...."[160] Ravenel in her _Eliza
Pinckney_ reconstructs from her notes a picture of one of those
dignified balls or fetes in the olden days:
"On such an occasion as that referred to, a reception for the
young bride who had just come from her own stately home of Ashley
Hall, a few miles down the river, the guests naturally wore all
their braveries. Their dresses, brocade, taffety, lute-string,
|